DOCUMENT RESUME ED 253 744 · DOCUMENT RESUME ED 253 744 CE 040 757 TITLE Job Corps Amendments of...

DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 253 744 CE 040 757

TITLE Job Corps Amendments of 1984. Hearing before theCommittee on Labor and Human Resources, United StatesSenate, Ninety-Eighth Congress, Second Session on S.2111, to Amend Part B of Title IV of the Job TrainingPartnership Act, to Strengthen the Job CorpsProgram.

INSTITUTION Congress of the U.S., Washington, D.C. SenateCommittee on Labor and Human Resources.

REPORT NO S-Hrg-98-1153PUB DATE 8 Feb 84NOTE 175p.; Document contains small type.PUB TYPE Legal/Legislative/Regulatory Materials (090)

EDRS PRICE MF01 Plus Postage. PC Not Available from EDRS.DESCRIPTORS Cooperative Planning; Cooperative Programs;

Disadvantaged Youth; *Dropout Programs; *EconomicallyDisadvantaged; Educational Cooperation; EducationalEquipment; Educational Facilities; *EducationalLegislation; Educational Needs; EducationalObjectives; Evaluation Criteria; *FederalLegislation; Financial Needs; Financial Support; *JobTraining; Policy Formation; Program Effectiveness;Program Evaluation; Public Policy; RehabilitationPrograms; School Business Relationship;' SecondaryEducation; Vocational Education; VocationalRehabilitation; Youth Programs

IDENTIFIERS Amendments; Congress 98th; Department of Labor; *JobCorps; Job Training Partnership Act 1982; PrivateSector

ABSTRACTThis Congressional report contains testimony

pertaining to amending the Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA) tostrengthen the Job Corps Program. The primary focus of the hearingwas on the current adequacy and future potential of the Job Corps'vocational and basic education programs, facilities and equipment,residential living and enrichment programs, as well as the adequacyof the Department of Labor's budget and personnel resources toachieve Job Corps' goals. Included among those persons providingtestimony at the hearing were representatives of the followingagencies and organization:,: Teledyne Economic Development Company;Management and Training Corporation; the National Football LeaguePlayers Association; Minact, Inc.; and the Singer Company. A JobCorps vocational review and a memorandum from Peter E. Rell, thedirector of the Office of Job Corps, concerning establishment ofperformance standards for Job Corps Centers are also provided in thetext of the hearing. Statements were also presented by Patrick J.O'Keefe, of the U.S. Department of Labor, and by Jennings Randolph, aU.S. Senator from West Virginia. (MN)

***********************************************************************

Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be madefrom the original document.

******************************* ***************************************

S. Hilo. 98-1153

JOB CORPS AMENDMENTS OF 1984

HEARINGBEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON

LABOR AND HUMAN RESOURCES

UNITED STATES SENATENINETY-EIGHTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

ON

S. 2111To AMEND PART B OF TITLE IV OF THE JOB TRAINING PARTNERSHIP

ACT, TO STRENGTHEN THE JOB CORPS PROGRAM

FEBRUARY 8, 1984

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC)

Vtus document has been reproduced asreceived from the person or organizationoriginating itMinor r hanges have been Mad() to improve

ieprocluctam quality

Points of view or opinions stated in this docu

merit do not necessarily represent official NIE

position or policy

Printed for the use of the Committee on Labor and Human Resources

OOVFIRNMENT PRINTINO OFFICEI f1 WASEONO'FON : I 9144

2

COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND HUMAN RESOURCES

ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah, ChairmanROBERT T. STAFFORD, VermontDAN QUAYLE, IndianaDON NICKLES, OklahomaJEREMIAH DENTON, AlabamaLOWELL P. WEICKER, JR., ConnecticutCHARLES E. GRASSLEY, IowaJOHN P. EAST, North CarolinaPAULA HAWKINS, FloridaSTROM THURMOND, South Carolina

RONALD F. DOCKSAL Staff Direct&KATHRYN OIL. HIGGINS, Minority Staff Director

EDWARD M. KENNEDY, MassachusettsJENNINGS RANDOLPH, West VirginiaCLAIBORNE PELL, Rhode IslandTHOMAS F. EAGLETON, MissouriDONALD W. RIEGLE, JR., MichiganHOWARD M. METZENBAUM, OhioSPARK M. MATSUNAGA, HawaiiCHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut

3

CONTENTS

STATEMENTS

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 1984

PageGaines, John, president, Teledyne Economic Development Co., Loa Angeles,

CA 134Prepared statement 137Marquardt, Fobert L., chairman and president, Management and TrainingCorp., Ogden, UT 150Prepared statement 153

National Football League Players Association [NFLPAI. prepared statement 168O'Keefe, Patrick J., Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Employ-ment and Training, Department of Labor 6Prepared statement 7

Randolph, Hon. Jennings, a U.S. Senator from the State of West Virginia 2Prepared statement 5Simmons, 0.H., corporate secretary, Minact, Inc., Jackson, MS 126Prepared statement 128Watkins, Herb W., vice president and general manager, the Singer Co., career

system, Rochester, NY 145. Prepared statement 148Articles, publications, etc.:

Job Corps vocational review 16Establishment of performance stands. ds for Job Corps Centers, from

Peter E. Rell, Director, Office of Job Corps 74

4

JOB CORPS AMENDMENTS OF 1984

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 1984

U.S. SENATE,COMMITTEE ON LABOR A. HUMAN RESOURCES,

Washington, DCThe committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:15 a.m., in room SD-

430, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Senator Orrin Hatch (chair-man of the committee) presiding.

Present: Senators Hatch, Hawkins, and Randolph.

OPENING STATEMENT OF 3ENATOR HATCHThe CHAIRMAN. I would like to welcome everyone to our hearing

this morning to examine the U.S. Job Corps Program. During thismorning's hearing we will assess the program's needs, its adminis-tration, and what I believe to be its potential.

First established in 1965, .the Job Corps currently serves 40,000young men and women per year between the ages of 16 and 21. Itprovides education, occupational skills training, residential andcounseling services to economically disadvantaged youth who havedropped out of school, who are doomed to hang out on street cor-ners, in bars, or with gangs, or who have turned to drugs, alcohol,and to criminal activity. These young people have been disillu-sioned by the traditional school system and they have experiencedrejection and failure. Their decision to drop out of school com-pounds these feelings of failure and locks them into an antisocial,unproductive, and emotionally crippling way of life. These youngpeople waste their potential and their futures. The Job Corps pro-vides an effective way out of the personal stagnation caused by pov-erty and lack of education.

Since its beginning 16 years ago, the Job Corps has recognizedand successfully targeted its efforts on this group of youth whichother institutions are tempted to writeoff. By giving these youngpeople a practical way to overcome their disadvantaged past, theJob Corps motivates these youth to value independence, education,hard work, and self-esteem instead of drug or alcohol addiction,welfare dependence, illiteracy, and defeatism.

In fiscal year 1983, 50 percent of all enrollees in Job Corps ob-tained jobs or successfully enlisted in the military. In addition, 25percent pursued advanced educational or vocational training. Thisadds up to an impressive 75 percent positive termination rate.

We should not, however, overlook areas for improvement in theJob Corps Program. Our hearing this morning will focus on thecurrent adequacy and future potential of Job Corps' vocational andbasic education programs, facilities and equipment, residentialliving and enrichment programs, as well as the adequacy of the De-

(l)

2

partnient of Labor's budget and personnel resources to achieve JobCorps' goals.

Those of us who are committed to the Job Corps Program arealso obligated to address its ongoing needs and to torrent immedi-ately those problems that may endanger student safety and health,learning ability, or the development of a positive attitude througha positive milieu. Several specific proposals to improve the JobCorps' operation are spelled out in the bill I introduced earlier thisyear, S. 2111, legislation for Job Corps reform.

These major issues should be addressed by Congress to ensurethe present and future effectiveness of the Job Corps as a tool formainstreaming these disadvantaged black youth and minorityyouth and minority women, as well as others, into society as pro-ductive citizens. Of course, the Job Corps has been, and still is, ateam effort. This is why I would like to take this opportunity toexpress my appreciation to the U.S. Department of Labor for itswillingness to work with this committee.

I also wish to express my admiration and appreciation to BobMarquardt and others working with him, here representing theManagement and Training Corp. of Ogden, UT. I believe mostwould agree that its Clearfield Job Corps Center is very exemplary.

Together, we can take the necessary action to improve the oper-ation of the Job Corps for the benefit of young people who )- lye no-where to go but upward and onward.

My personal commitment to Job Corps does not outweigh thefact that I think there are things that are wrong, that there arethings that need to be improved, that there are reforms that needto be made, and that is true of every entity of Government. It isnot just limited to the Job Corps.

I would not be doing my job as the *airman of this committee ifI were not interested in helping the job Corps to be the absolutelybest organization it can possibly be.

I think many efforts are being made voluntarily in both the pri-vate and public sectors to actually accomplish that.

I personally appreciate the witnesses taking time to be here thismorning.

We will turn right now to our distinguished Senator from WestVirginia and dear colleague, Senator Randolph.

STATEMENT OF HON. JENNINGS RANDOLPH, A U.S. SENATORFROM THE STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA

Senator RANDOLPH. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.It is a privilege and a responsibility to join with you and, others

as we examine very carefully the Job Corps Program. Hopefully weshall make constructive suggestions in today's dialog between wit-

, nesses and members of this committee.I am strongly supportive of this effort which provides training in

vocational skills, for disadvantagedyoung people who are 14 to 21years of age.

The residential centers across America provide outstanding envi-ronments in which young people learn and grow. In addition, manyworthwhile community projects are completed by the participants

3

as they learn skills and work habits, which they can and do trans-late into productive jobs later in their lives.

Of course, it is natural that I would be more familiar with theJob Corps Program and activities in West Virginia than in otherparts of the country. We have two residential centers in our State.One is at the State capital in Charleston, and the other is in histor-ic Harpers Ferry, the extreme point of ,what we call the easternpanhandle of West Virginia.

We have recruitment programs which are being carried forwardin towns and communities, both large and small across the entireState.

The success of the Job Corps in West Virginia has been demon-strated over and over. There are thousandsand I undericore theword "thousands"of young people who have been helped by theJob Corps. Those stories, I hope through the action of this commit-tee and the Congress, will continue.

The West Virginia Job Corps Centers provide training for a verywide range of skills. We are fortunate that our two centers in WestVirginia offer a variety of experiences. These Job Corps facilitieshave enrollments in West Virginia at the present time of .650youth. I will call them students. I will call them workers. I will callthem, very proudly, young people in the process of learning.

The Job Corps at Charleston is the second oldest in the UnitedStates of America. It will be 20 years of age on June 6, 1935, and isat the present time serving more than 400 individuals. I had theopportunity of attending the dedication of the Charleston Centerwhen it was established.

This Center is operated by the Management and Training Corpo-ration, located in a State that our chairman thinks' well of, theState of Utah. As I think of this Ogden-based management firmand what it has done, I am pleased.

I have recently received an informative magazine from the Clear-field Job Corps Center in Utah. I learned much about the operationof that facility, which is also operated by the management andtraining corp.

The magazine is not printed with Federal funds. I think it is im-portant to make that statement. You naturally wonder, where doesit get its support? It is supported entirely by local advertising.

We are anxiously awaiting the publication of a comparable mag-azine about the Charleston Center. That would begin in April. Al-ready we are gratified to report to this committee hearing thatthere are over 90 citizens on the local community relations councilfor the Job Corps Center in Charleston who have put in money topay for a full page ad each month. It is this type of community sup-port that has been the hallmark of Job Corps over the years.

Our second Center in West Virginia, the Harpers Perry Center,is one of 30 Civilian Conservation Corps Centers. It is operated bythe U.S. Department of the Interior.

I think we have some disagreement today of where these pro-grams should be located. I believe the programs within the Depart-ment of the Interior are well managed, and I think we should givecareful attention to continuing at least some centers under thatFederal agency.

4

I feel very kindly toward Job Corps because, without my knowl-ede, they constructed a bridge and they named it in my memory.

The CHAIRMAN. I always wondered about you, Senator.Senator RANDOLPH. I remember I took a high hat and wore it as

I marched across that bridge at Harpers Ferry, where once, in thewaters below, we had a factory that turned out guns. This was notin the war between the States but in the beginning years whenHarpers Ferry was an important entry point to the West.

I must be forgiven, also, for saying that I may put in the recordwhat Thomas Jefferson said about the beauty of that part of WestVirginia. I think I will do that. May I have the privilege of quot-ing---

The CHAIRMAN. You certainly may.Senator RANDOLPH [continuing]. From Thomas Jefferson?[The quotation referred to follows:]

THOMAS JEFFERSON ON HARPER'S FERRY

In 1781, Thomas Jefferson, who later became the third President of the UnitedStates, wrote of the majesty and grandcur of the scenery at Harper's Ferry:

"The passage of the Potomac through the Blue Ridge is, perhaps, one of the moststupendous scenes in nature, and worthy of a trip across the Atlantic."

Senator RANDOLPH. I rememberwhen I proposed the creation ofthe Harpers Ferry National Historical Park. Now that was back in1944, that period of time. I have the opportunity now to speak ofwhat we have done there. We had last year 1 million visitors, Mr.Chairman, to the Harpers Ferry National Historical Park. The res-torations there are worth the visit of many people to that area; notonly those of West Virginia, but also those of the nearby areas.Harper's Ferry is approximately 1 hour to the west of Washington,DC.

Only employing a few people in the beginning, we have now theemployment of approximately 450 men and women directly and in-directly at the park. We have the Mather Training Center, namedafter Mr. Mather who was the first Director of the Park Service inthis country. We have the Design Center which provides help to allof the parks of the United States of America. We have the trainingprograms for personnel that go across this Nation in our parks.

Then, of course, the Harpers Ferry Park itself is a place of infor-mation and joy to visit. We have had the help of the Job Corps inmany, many such worthwhile programs.

Harpers Ferry, I repeat, it is 1 of 30 Civilian Conservation CorpsCenters. It is operated by the Interior Department. I am not surewhy you wish to relocate these centers, Mr. Chairman, and to havethem placed in one or two other agencies, but I am sure you havegood reason. That would be a matter for discussion.

We are currently operating in excess of its capacity of 210 youth.The Center at Harpers Ferry has provided not only training, but

educational facilities for thousandsnot hundreds, but thousandsof young people. These projects, forgetting the bridge across thestream, are constructive projects. The communities nearbhelped by this Job Corps. The Job Corps Program is a suc ssWest Virginia. 24,

However, I do want to hear the discussion from the witnessesand, if there are needs for reform and changes with the Job Corps

5

format, I would certainly be listening very carefully and hope to becooperative in that respect:Thank you.[The prepared statement of Senator Randolph follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR RANDOLPH

Senator RANDOLPH. Mr. Chairman, it is a privilege to join you this morning as weexamine the Job Corps Program. I am strongly supportive of this effective programto provide vocational skills training for disadvantaged young people aged 14 to 21.The residential centers across the nation provide outstanding environments foryoung people to learn and grow; in addition, many worthwhile community projectsare completed by the participants as they learn skills and work habits which theyare able to translate into productive jobs later.Of course, I am most familiar with the Job Corps activities in West Virginia. Wehave 2 residential centers, in Charleston and in Harpers Ferry, but we have recruit-ment taking place in towns and communities acorss the State.The success of the Job Corps in West Virginia has been demonstrated time andagain. There are thousands of young people who have been helped by the Job Corps,and I want those success stories to continue.The West Virginia Job Corps centers provide a wide range of skills training andwe are fortunate that our two centers in West Virginia offer a variety of experi:ences. Together, the two West Virginia Job Corps facilities have enrollments total-ling more than 650 students.The Charleston Job Corps center is the second oldest center in the nation; it willbe twenty years old June 6, 1985 and is currently serving more than 400 students.The center is operated by the Mangagement and Training Corporation of Ogden,Utah, and I have recently received an informative magazine from the ClearfieldCenter in Utah which is also operated by the Management and Training Corpora-tion. The magazine is not printed with government funds, but is supported entirelyby local advertising. We are anxiously waiting for the publication of a comparablemagazine about the Charleston center to begin in April. Already over 90 citizens onthe local community relations council for the Job Corps center in Charleston haveput in money to pay for a full page ad each month. It is this kind of communitysupport that has been the hallmark of Job Corps over the years.Our second center in West Virginia, the Harpers Ferry Job Corps center is one of30 Civilian Conservation Corps Centers. It is operated by the Department of the In-terior. Our Harpers Ferry center is currently operating in excess of its capacity of210, now serving 224 young people. Over the years, the Harpers Ferry Center hasprovided education and training for thousands of young people, as well as providedmany constructive projects for the community.

Mr. Chairmen, I could go on about the successes of the Job Corps in West Virgin-ia, but I am anxious to hear our witnesses this morning and to review your legisla-tion for reform of this program.The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator. We appreciate your com-ments.We will begin our hearings this morning by calling Patrick J.O'Keefe, of the Department of Labor, the Acting Deputy AssistantSecretary of Labor for Employment and Training.We are very happy to have you with us.Let me just say this: I would appreciate it if all witnesses wouldsummarize their testimonies. We will just state at the beginning ofthe hearing that we will put the complete testimony of all wit-nesses into the hearing record as though fully delivered. That willenable us to have more time for questions.I have to be to the Rules Committee by 11 o'clock, so I am a littlebit concerned about getting through this hearing.We will turn to you, Mr. O'Keefe, and take your testimony atthis time.

6

STATEMENT OF PATRICK J. O'KEEFE, ACTING DEPUTY ASSIST-ANT SECRETARY OF LABOR FOR EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING,DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Mr. O'KEEFE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.As you requested, I will just make a few key points and submit

for the record our formal statement.As the committee and you certainly know, Mr. Chairman, the

Job Corps is a unique training and employment initia'ive. As aprofile of the average Corps member displays that we are submit-ting for the record, it is directed toward the most severely handi-capped youth.

To prepare these youth for the labor market, the program pro-vides Corps members with a broad array of services. As a result,the Job Corps is also an expensive program. We are submitting forthe record a historical summary of the cost of the Job Corps.

Through several measures over the past several years, we havebeen able to restrain the cost increases in this program and, infact, in real terms the costs of the program have been going downsomewhat.

For fiscal year 1985, our budget proposes $600 million for the JcbCorps. At this level of funding, we will be able to maintain the cur-rent capacity of the program; that is, 40,544 service years. This willrequire further efficiencies, however.

Over the past 3 years we have directed considerable attention toimproving the administration and management of the program andcorrecting several problems that existed when the administrationfirst came into office.

For a brief illustration, we have over the past 3 years instituted.new procedures to assure the proper reporting and handling of sig-nificant incidents. We have revised the procurement system. Wehave improved the program's budget and financial managementsystems. We have recently completed an assessment of all vocation-al training programs the Job Corps offers, and we have developedprogram performance standards which will be coming on line nextspring.

Like you, Mr. Chairman, we recognize that additional improve-ments are necessary, and a major priority of ours in the comingmonths will be the development and implementation of a systemfor identifying and addressing facilities needs.

Mr. Chairman, you and the committee are to be congratulatedfor undertaking this timely examination of the Job Corps. We arenow happy to respond to any questions that you or other membersof the committee have.

[The prepared statement of Mr. O'Keefe follows:]

i0

7

TESTIMONY OF PATRICK J. O'KEEFEACTING DI PWrY ASSISTANT SECTARY OF LABOR

FOR EMPLOYMENT AND TRAININCBEFORE THE

COMMillEE ON LABOR AND HUMAN RESOURCESUNITED STATES SENATE

FEBRUARY 8, 1984

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee:

Thank you for the invitation to appear before you

to review the Job Corps program and the measures that we

are taking to improve it. With me today are Roberts T.

Jones, Administrator of our Comprehensive Employment ana

Training °aloe and Peter Rell, Director of the Job Corps

Office.

Like all training and employment programs, the Job

Corps is committed to increasing the employment and earninys

of those it serves. As you know, Mr. Chairman, Job Corps

is unique in several key ways:

First, the Job Corps targets the most

Severely disadvantaged youth, as is dis-

played on the corpsmembers profile that

we are submitting for the record.

Second, the Job. Corps provides a comprehen-

sive array of services to all enrollees,

including: vocational training, remedial

education, health care, counseling and

other services.

11

8

- 2 -

Third, tho Jo5 C(irp:; odly limited

exception, a residential program.

An indepoodenL evaluation of post-program expurience

of enrollees entering the program in Fiscal Year 1977 prior

to the doubling of the program -- indicates that the program

is effective and that its benefits exceed its costs.

Obviously, given the nature an1 intensity of its services,

the lob Corps is 7'n expensive initiative. We astimate

that, for Program Year 1984, the average cost per corpsmember

will be $14,648; this compares with an estimated $13,683

for Fiscal Year 1983,

For Program Year 1985, we propose $600 million for

the Job Corps. This funding, coupled with several cost-

saving initiatives, will be adequate to maintain service

levels at the current 40,544 slots.

In the late 1970s, the Job Corps undertook a major

expansion, nearly doubling in size. The administrative

and oversight capacities of the program do not appear to

have kept pace with this expansion and problems developed

on several fronts. From the outset of this administration,

therefore, we have devoted substantial attention to rectify-

ing the deficiencies in the overall administration and

accountability of the Job Corps, And although these efforts

are not yet complete, substantial progress has been made.

1.2

- 3 -

,One of our iirst initiatives%%loc.; to overhaul completely

.

the Job Corps prourement system to provide a set of checks

and balances that minimize the potential for abuse. We

43tablished standardized procedures for all procurement

actions and clearly defined staff responsibilities in the

procurement process. Major emphasis was placed on utilizing

the competitive process in procurements.

1.et me briefly summarize several other steps that

we have taken:

To improve financial management systems, we estab-

lished a unified budgetary structure for planning

and tracking job Corps costs. We strengthened

accountability through the development ofautomated

Systems, revision of reporting requirements,

and utilization of the. unified budget system

in planning, internal 'control and cost reporting.

-- A comprehensive audit program was implemented

to eliminate a backlog of unaudited Job Corps

contracts, The Department is now providing audit

coverage -- including audit resolution and debt

collection activities: for all'mAjor functional.

areas.

13

el

O

10

4

We have developed perfdr-nett standards for the

Job Corps. ,These stanaaras will be in place

this spring and will be :%corporatea into the

procurement process for contract centers.

Duriny the last year, new procedures were imple-

mented goVerning center cperators' prevention,

reporting and resolution of significant incidents.

We completed a comprehensive review of all voca-

tional training programs to determine their effec-t

tiveness and to identify nigh. growth occupations

which will offer incresea placement potential.

-- Finally, we are developing improvements in our

system for identifying ana addressing facilities

needs.

During the coming year we will continue to improve

our fiscal control and management systems, including revising

its administrative publications.

The changes that we have implemented have enabled

us to restrain the growth of operational unit costs; in

real terms, we have reduced them.

14

11

5

Rising program costs continue to he of major concern-,

however. We are submitting for the record a table summarizing

program budget, service levels, and unit costs over recent

years. As noted earlier, cost per service year is projected

to rise to $14,64R in the 1984 PrOgram Year. In addition

to expenditures for operations, there are significant funding

requirements for capital expenditures to maintain and assure

the safety and health oc the corpsmembers.

As noted before, our Fiscal Year 1905 budget will main-

tain th.p enrollee capacity at the level of 40,544 service

years., To accomplish this in the face of rising costs,

some cost-saving measures will be necessary. Specific measures

will include: limiting capital expenditures for facility

construction and rehabilitation; and increasing overall

productivity through more efficient use of center resources.

Even with these efficiencies, however, the cost per service

year will continue to increase and Job Corps will remain

one of the most expensive training programs in the country.

15

12

- 6

Mr. Chairman,, you ana the other members of the Comclittee

are to be congratulated for undertaking this timely examina-

tion of the Job Corps. Given the resources it commands

and the number of individuals it affects, we must assure

that every element of the program is functiOning efficiently.

We must be confident that the program will increase the

employment and earnings of those it serves, and that it

does so more effectively than other, less costly alterna-

tives.

It is in that context that the Department will continue

to assess all aspects of the Job Corps. To support our

etfOrts, we are initiating a comprehensive evaluation of

the impacts of the program.

Although we believe we have made considerable progress

in our efforts to strengthen the Job corps, we recognize

that additional improvements are possible. With your support,

and given the flexibility of the current legislation, we

believe we will be able to increase the program's effective-

ness i increasing the lifetime earnings and employment

of the economically disadvantaged youth we serve.

Thank you for the opportunity to appear at these hear-

ings. We will be happy to respond to your questions.

1.6

13

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you so much.We are also happy that you have with yon Mr. Roberts T. Jones,

who is the Administrator of the Office of Comprehensive Employ-ment and Training at the Department of Lattor, and Mr. PeterRell, of the Department of Labor, who is Director of the Job Corps.

We are happy to have you gentlemen with us as well. I wouldhope that any of you would feel free to respond to any of the ques-tions that we have here this morning.

How much money is needed to maintain a 40,500-slot level, giventhe current programs only and no other competing uses of thefunds?

Mr. O'KEEFE. Mr. Chairman, in the fiscal year 1985 budget wehave proposed $600 million for the program. We believe that thatlevel of funding will be adequate to maintain the service level thatyou have just cited. It will, as I said, though, require some addition-al efficiencies in the management of the program.

The CHAIRMAN. Don't the Conservation Corps Centersdoesn'ttheir funding come right off the top of the DOL Job Corps appro-priation?

Mr. O'KEEFE. Yes, sir.The CHAIRMAN. How much did the Conservation Centers con-

sume of your appropriations in fiscal year 1983?Mr. O'KEEFE. I will ask Mr. Rell to give you that.The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Rell?Mr. RELL. Mr. Chairman, I have the numbers for fiscal year 1984

handy, if that would suffice: approximately $56 million to the Dpartment of Agriculture and approximately $36 million to thpartment of the Interior.

The CHAIRMAN. Somewhere near $90 million?Mr. RELL. Yes, sir.The CHAIRMAN. How much of this do you expect to save in fiscal

year 1985 if the CCC's are contracted out to the private sector?Mr. O'KEEFE. Mr. Chairman, if we can bring the CCC's into a

competitive cost range with the DOL-administered programs, weestimate the savings would be on the order of $15 million.

The CHAIRMAN. I see. Now the Conservation Centers are operat-ed by the Interior and the Agriculture Departments; am I right onthat?

Mr. O'KEEFE. That is correct, sir.The CHAIRMAN. How much coordination is there between the

DOL and these two Departments with regard to these items?Mr. O'KEEFE. There is coordination at the departmental level in

terms of overall policy formulation, the formulation of the budgetrequest, things such as that.

I will ask Mr. Jones or Mr. Rell to comment further, but they dohave a substantial amount of autonomy, as any other Federalagency should of our agency.

The CHAIRMAN. I see., Do you care to comment?

Mr. RELL. In addition to the planning and policy developmentinteragency at the national level, the DOL (Department of Labor]regional offices, also monitor and conduct reviews of the CivilianConservation Centers on an annual basis, Mr. Chairman. As aresult of those reviews, inevitably, as one might expect, there are

10-051 0-84---2

17

14

problems, difficulties, and shortcomings. Those are then worked outon a cooperative basis between the Department of Labor regionaloffices and the appropriate people in the Agriculture and Interioragencies.

The CHAIRMAN. What are the major differences between the JobCorps Centers run by Interior and Agriculture besides the cost inadministrative apparatus? Are there any significant differences inoutcome for students enrolled in these two types of centers?

Mr. O'KEEFE. There are not, as far as I know, differences in theoutcomes by center that we have been able to identify. I do notthink we have had an evaluation that would give you a solidanswer to that, though, Senator.

The CHAIRMAN. Who is responsible for auditing the ConservationCenters' programs, and when were the audits undertaken lastyear?

. Mr. RELL. Mr. Chairman, the Department of Agriculture Centerswere last audited in fiscal year 1978 by the Department of Labor'sOffice of the Inspector General. The Department of the InteriorCenters have been audited on an individual, center-by-center basisby the Department of the Interior's Office of the Inspector General.Depending on which center we are talking about, the audit cover-are, the last audit coverage is somewhere between 1975 ar4 1981.

the CHAIRMAN. Turning to vocational and basic education pro-grams, what was the impetus for the vocational review undertakenby the Employment and Training Administration last year?

Mr. O'KEEFE. Mr. Chairman, with a program as expensive perparticipant as the Job -Corps Program is, one cannot afford to takeopportunity to reduce those costs and increase effectiveness. Thebasic policy purpose for that review was to make sure that everyvocational offering that we have there is going to the maximumextent possible increase the competitiveness of the Job Capsmember when they move back into the regular labor market. Itwas a very thorough review.

I think both Mr. Jones and Mr. Rell, and those who supportedthem in it, have done a great service to the program. We expectreal benefit from it in the coming years.

The CHAIRMAN. What were your findings from that review?Mr. O'KEEFE. I would ask Peter to summarize that for you.Mr. RELL. Mr. Chairman, on an overall basis, we discovered that

the current vocational offers in Job Corps are well targeted in rela-tion to the expected labor market demand through 1990. We did,however, identify a number of new occupations which would bevery suitable for Job Corps trainees and which we will be consider-ing for addition to the curriculum. Those are primarily clerical oc-cupations, health-related occupations, and automated data process-ing-related occupations.

We analyzed our past success in various different vocational of-ferings, Mr. Chairman, and assessed their relative effectiveness,We 'have targeted a close examination of those which show to berelatively less effective. We will do such an examination on acenter-by-center basis in order to take into account the characteris-tics of the Corps members attending, particularly centers in thelocal labor markets that those centers serve.

18

15

Any decisions to replace relatively ineffective occupations withperhaps some of the new ones that we have identified will be madeon a center-by-center basis. -

The CHAIRMAN. How do you plan to keep the vocational pro-grams current vis-a-vis the labor market? In other words, how cana national program like Job Corps be responsive to the localdemand for various occupations?

Mr. O'KEEFE. Mr. Chairman, I will ask Peter again to addressthat in more detail, but I would like to offer at this time that wesubmit for the record the vocational study that we did, the summa-ry volumes of it.

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, we will place that in therecord at this point.

[Material supplied for the record follows:]

19

16

JOB CORPSVOCATIONAL REVIEW

PURPOSE

o Identify changes appropriate in Job Corps vocational offerings

o Not an evaluation of overall Job Corps program performance

APPROACH

o Used workgroup supplemented by Advisory Committee of outsideexperts

XExamined BLS demand projections to 1990 for potential offerings

o Examined JC offerings to assess past success in terms of out-con461and cost

METHODOLOGY

o Analyzed BLS projections for high growth occupations with edu-cation/skill xequirements appropriate to Job Corps

o Analyzed existing occupations and ranked them in terms ofrelative effectiveness'

.- FY 82 data was used with restricted definitions

o Effectiveness criteria used with weights assigned by managers are

Effectiveness Criteria Weight

Percent Job Place 4

Average Wage at Job Entry 1

Cost per Job Placement 4

Cost per Training Year 2

Absolute Employment Growth, 1980-1990 2

Percentage Employment Growth, 1980-1990 1

o The Weights represent a balance between outcomes (5) and costs (6)

- unweighted rankings produce very similar results

o No attempt was made to assess occupations in terms of inherentvalue or prestige nor to evaluate p rocess factors such as qualityof instruction

20

17

- 2 -

o To guide examination of particular offerings, the ranking listwas divided into three groups -- upper, middle and lower

occupations with effectiveness scores more than one standarddeviation below the mean score were designated for specialattention

occupations with cost per job placement exceeding twice thenational average or having negative growth projections werealso specially identified

RESULTS

o The relative effectiveness rank of occupations -- broken outby service provider -- is shown on Attachment 1

lower group shows a disproportionate number of nationallycontracted and CCC operated occupations:vs center operatedtraining

generally, center operated occupations had relatively lowcosts and low outcomes; nationally contracted occupationaltraining had relatively high costs and high outcomes;. CCCtrained occupations were in the middle

12 new high growth occupations were identified as potentialadditions to existing occupational offerings in five areas

Clerical

Work Processing Machine OperatorData Entry OperatorBookeeping/Billing Machine OperatorPayroll ClerkProof Machine Operator

Electrical/Appliance Repair

.. Office Machine Repairer

Industrial Production

Production Painter

- Health Occupations

Emergency Medical TechnicianSurgical TechnicianX-Ray Technician

21

18

- ADP Related Occupations

.. Computer dud Peripheral ADP Equipment Operator

.. Computer Service Technician

IMPLEMENTATION

o Since the study results are based on national averages, theyprovide only a starting point for making center -by- center changes

- a poorly rated occupation may do very well at particularcenters and very poorly at others

wdIo Contract Centers, CCC's and national training providersabe asked

to examine offerings in the lower group of occupations (andextreme cost and negative growth occupations) and to recommendreplacement or continuation

- to continue an occupation rated low on a national basis, acenter or contractor would need to demonstrate

.. performance substantially better than the nationalaverage for that occupation and/or

substantially lower costs and/or

.. substantially better labor market prospects in the locallabor markets relevant to the center's corpsmembers

- centers with occupations at the very bottom of the rankings(below the standard deviation line) will be required to sub-mit a preponderance of convincing evidence to retain thatoccupation

o This process will ensure that local input relevant to corpsmemberstraining at each center will be considered (rather than arbit.arynational decisions)

- centers and national contractors will also have the oppor-tunity to factor in most recent (FY 83) performance and tomake/propose cost reductions

o Centers will propose new occupations from either the top ratedgroup of occupations or the list of potential new occupationsidentified in the study

o Final decisionmaking will be at the national level

- equipment and curricula for new occupations may be centrallyprocured if cost savings can be achieved

- legislative requirements to increase female enrollment willconsidered in making final decisions

22

19

- 4 -

' As decisions are made, appropriate modificatioAs will be madeto

- center operating contracts

- national training contracts

- CCC staffing

In the interim, national training contracts are being writtenfor a 15 month period (4/1/84-6/30/85) at the current levelwith provisions to incorporate the final decisions regardingvocational changes on a center by center basis

Finally, a system for updating/improving the vocational review'

study will be established to ensure that all vocational offer-ings are reviewed on a regular (e.g., bi-annual) basis

23

20

AT1ACrIMENT I

TRAINING OCCUPATION RELATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RANK

UPPER GROUP

TRAINING OCCUPATIONEFFECTIVENESS RANK

NUMBER OFTRAINEES

TRAININGPROVIDER TOTAL SCORE

1. Auto Parts Clerk 45 Center 126

2. Welder, Gas MetalArc. 60 Center 116

3. Forklift Operator 27 Center 1134. Kitchen Helper* 32 Center/CCC 111

5. Electronics Ass. 631 Center 110

6. Security Guard 84 Center 1097. Machine Operator 82 Center 108

8. Sheet Metal Worker 26 Center 1089. Warehouseman 180 Center 106

10.Pest Control 42 Center 103

11.Retail Sales Clerk 433 Center 102

12. Insulation Worker 25 Center 101

13.Electrician 623 Center 99

14.Dental Assistant 87 Center 99

15.Cook, Short Order 54 Center 99

16.Ward Clerk 188 Center 98

17.Clerk, General 62 B.R.A.C. 98

18.Teller 27 Center 97

19.Clerk, General 598 Center 96-7§.520.Electronic Tech. 25 Center

21.Nurse's Assistant 3,067 Center 94

22.Auto Service/Re-pairer 981 Center 94

23.Auto Service/Re-pairer 222 CCC 93

24.Cashier/Checker 161 Center 91

25.Diesel Mechanic 28 Center 91

26.Eectrician 149' N.A.H.B. 90.

27.Landscaper 397 Center 89

28.Auto MechanicHelper 562 Center 88

29.Hosp. Diet. Aide 39 Center 88

30.Clerk-Typist 3,154 Center 87

31.Brick/Stone Mason 45 . CCC- 87

32.Auto Body Repair 777 Center 86

33.Painter 95 N.A.H.B. 86

34.Meat Cutter 71 Center 85

X Upper Standard Deviation Line

Mean Score 78

Standard Deviation = 18

24

21

POTADMENT 1


MIDDLE GROUP


NUMBER OFTRAINEES


35. Combination Welder 1,880

,

Center 84

36. Accounting Clerk 276 Center 84

37. Machinist 87 Center 84

38. Waiter/Waitress 31 Center 84

39. Painter 431 Center 83

40. Electricial Appl. 103 Center 83

41. Machine Operator,

Lathe 45 Center 83

42. ProfessionalProgram Aide 42 Center 83

43. Plumber 277 Center 81

44. Custodial Maint. 232 N.A.H.B. 80

45. Solor Installer 139 N.A.H.B. 80

46. Li=censed Prac.

,Nurse 76 Center 80

47. Cement Mason 55 CCC (. 80

48. Brick/Stone Mason 639 Center 79

49. .S'ookkeeper 313 Center 79

50. Clerk Typist 51 - B.R.A.C. 79 ($)

51. Cook 1,940 Center 78

52. Welder, Spot 601 Center 78

53. Air Cond/Ref. Mech. 245 Center 78

54. -Offset Printer 213 Center 78

55'. Electrician Helper .62 Center 78

56. Plumber 209 N.A.H.B. 77

57. Draftsm.n 160 Center 76

5C. Custodial Maint. 1,226 Center 75

59. Brick/Stone Mason 88 N.A.H.B 75

60. Receptionist 144 Center 74

61. Welder, Combination 930 CCC 74

62. Auto Ser. Repair 131 U.A.W. 73 ($)

63. Ser. Stat. Atten. 121 Center 73

64. Telecommunications 56 AFL-CIO 73

65. Welder, Spot 50 CCC 73.

66. Secretary 69 Center 72

67. Furniture Uphol. 60 Center 72

68. Auto Body Repair 51 U.A.W. 72

69. Carpenter Const. 693 Center 71

70. Carpenter Const. 220 N.A.H.B. 71

71. Radio/TV Repair 47 Center 71'

72. Floor Layer* 34 Center/IBPAT 71

25

22

A::4%:-ItNT I


LOWER GROUP


NUMBER OFTRAINEES


73. Service Stat. Att. 30 AFL-C10 70

74. Carpenter Const. 1,228 U.B.C.J.A. 69

75. Cement Masc- 338 OPE/CMI 69

76. Teacher /Nursery 124 Center 69

77. Combination Welder 44 AFL-C10 69

78. Engineer Aide/ 30 I.U.O. E. 69 (S)

19. Heavy Equip. Oper. 158 I.U.O.E. 68 ($)

80. Auto Mesh. Helper 109 CCC 68

81. Tilesetter 58 I.M.I. 68 ($)

82. .Stock Clerk. 85 CCC 67

81- Small Gas pig. Rep_ 67 Center 67

84. Calc. Matt- Oper. 47 Center 67 (&)

85. Deektand,. 34 I.M.U. 67 (&)

36. Brick./Ste'Mason 539 1.M.I. 65

87. Forestry/Cnsier1.'' 127 CCC 64

88. Cement Mason 52 Center 64

89. Medical assistant 100 Center 6390. Painter 456 I. B. P. A. T. 62

91. Animp Caretaker 25 Center 62

92, Conts. 93 CCC 62

93. Heavy Equip. Rep. 2/ I.U.O.E. 61 ($)

94, Custodial95.-RailWaY Cleric 101

CCC

-13.527Are

60 XX

96. Cook E46 CCC 57

97. Keypunch Operator 359 Center 57 (&)

98, Baker 244 Center 57

99. Heavy Equip. Oper. 227 Center 56

100. DuplicatingMachine Operator 73 Center 55

101.Cement Mason 90 N.A.H.B. SA ($)

102. Cosmetologist 67 Center 54

103. Plasterer 290 0.P.C.M.I 49 ($)

104.Medical Lab Ass't. 27 Center/AFL- 47

CIO

105.Clerk-Typist 64 CCC 43 ($)

106. Stenographer 46 Center 41 (&)

107.Heavy Equip. Rep. 75 Center 31 ($)

108.Mail Clerk 38 AFL -CIO 29 ($)

*Data on trainees from two procurement groups were added.together to havea smaple of more than 25 trainees.

SCost Per Job Placement exceeds twice the National Average of 013,076.&Projected Absolute Growth or less than 1,000 new jobs between 1980-1990.

XXLower Standard Deviation Line

26

0

AIIACHMENT I

CODE KEY FOR TRAINING PROVIDERS

CODE EXPLANATION

AFL4I0 American Federation of Labor CongressOf Industrial Organizations

Brotherhood of Railway and AirlineClerks

B.R.A.C.

CENTER Contract Center

CCC Civilian Conservation Center

International Brotherhood of Paintersand Allied Trades

1. M.U.

I.U.O.E.

N.A.H.B.

0.P./C.M.I.

U.A.W.

U.B.C.J.A.

International Masonry Institute

International Maritime Union

International Union of Operating.Engineers

National Association of Homebuilderr

Operation Plesteretc alid Cement Mason'sInternational Association .

United Automobile Workers

United CrotenhOOd of Carpenters andJoiners of America

24

JOB CORPS

VOCATIONAL EDUCATION OFFERINGS REVIEW

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

November 1983

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

During FY 83, the National Office of Job Corps conducted a reviewof FY 82 vocational training offerings and an examination of labormarket trends and projections relevant to potential vocationaltraining offerings. The purpose of the review was to evaluate therelative effectiveness of current Job Corps vocational offeringsand to identify occupations suitable for addition to the Job Corpsvocational curricula. The review was not intended as an assess-ment of the overall effectiveness of the Job Corps program orindividual center performances but rather to take a long hard lookat which training occupations Job Corps should be offering to theircorpsmembers to increase their emplbyability throughout the 80's.

A Vocational Advisory Board was appointed at the beginning of thereview project. The Board included representatives of industry,labor unions, the federal government, un'iersity faculty, and anationwide educational. testing service. All the participantshave extensive backgrounds in vocational training. Several mem-bers have been indirectly associated with the Job Corps programfor many years. However, active Job Corps contractors were notselected to serve on the council.

The major functions of the Vocational Advisory Board were concernedwith.research. The members reviewed the research design and suggestedmethods to obtain and analyze data. The objectives of the study werediscussed particularly possible outcomes and redirection of voca-tional offerings.

The Vocational Advisory Board met periodically and actively partici-pated in the vocational review making major contributions to the work.The members' expertise and assistance was of substantial assistancein conducting the review and formulating recommendations.

A system for aggregating and analyzing information about Job Corpstraining offerings was developed for the review using labor marketprojections and occupational outlook materials from the Bureau ofLabor Statistics (BLS), demographic and placement outcome data fromthe Job Corps Management Information System (MIS) and training costdata collected from .:enters and national contractors. From thesedata criteria for judging the relative effectiveness of current JobCorps occupations were chosen and Job Corps managers assigned weightto the criteria dependent upon thei- importance in judging occupa-tional effectiveness. The six driteria chosen represented a balancebetween placement, cost and projections data. Training occupationiwere ranked on each of the six criteria and scored dependent upuntheir rank in relation to the other occupations and the weightassigned by the Job Corps managers. Occupational effectivenessscores were computed by totaling each occupations scores on eachof the criteria. The following are the six criteria used and theweights that were assigned.

2f

26

- 2 L-

TRAINING OCCUPATION RELATIVEEFFECTIVENESS CRITERIA WEIGHT

1. Percent Job Placed 4

2. Average Wage of Job 13. Cost Per Job Placement 44. Cost Per Training Year 2

5. Absolute Employment Growth, 1980-1990 2

6. Percentage Employment Growth, 1980-1990 1

A ranked list of 80 Job Corps training occupations separated bythe training provider was produced using the total occupationaleffectiveness score to indicate which current occupations wererelatively more effective than others. The list was dividedinto three groups upper, middle and lower dependent upon theoccupations rank in occupational effectiveness, (see Attachment 1).Since the analysis is based on national data, the implementationof the vocational changes will carefully examine potential offer-ings to be replAced on a center-by-center basis to ensure that achange at that particular center is as appropriate as the overallnational ranking list suggests. Centers will be asked to examinethose training occupations in the lower group and suggest alterna-tive training occupations if performance in an occupation was alsopoor at the canter level. Fourteen training occupations had occu-pational effectiveness score more than one.standard deviation belowthe mean score of 78. Centers will be asked to replace these train-ing occupations with those with high effectiveness scores or withnew occupations identified as appropriate for addition to Job Corpsunless the center can provide substantial evidence to warrant theirretention.

New training occupations with potential for addition to Job Corpvocational. training offerings were identified by examining Bureauof Labor Statistics Occupational Employment Survey (OES) data andchoosing those who met the criteria of being high growth occupa-tions that required less than two years of training and a highschool or less education. Before being included on a list ofpotential additions, an occupation had to have a growth of over10,000 new job openings and.18.5% overall increase in the next tenyears and gain consensus approval. from a panel of National JobCorps staff. Attachment Iris the final list of suitable newtraining occupations.

The examination of BLS projections data revealed the fact that JobCorps is currently well targeted in its vocational offerings, pro-viding training mostly in entry level occupations which can beconsidered high growth. By conducting this vocational review and

30

- 3 -

repeating the process periodically, the national office of JobCorps can assure that the substantial majority of Job Corpsenrollees have the opportunity to be trained in the occupationswith the best overall performance records and potential in thelabor market. It will ensure that new high growth occupationsare introduced into the Job Corps system, and that demonstrablypoor performing occupations are regularly identified, reviewedand eliminated unless special circumstances warrant their con-tinuation. In this manner, Job Corps centers-will retain theflexibility needed to tailor their training programs to corps-member's needs.

31

28

ATTACHMENT I


MIDDLE GROUP


NUMBER OFTRAINEES .


35. Combination Welder ilaso Center 84


37. Machinist 87' Center 84



40. Electricial Appl. 103 Center 83

41. Machine Operator,Lathe 45 Center 83





46. Licensed Prac.Nurse 76 Center 80

47. Cement Mason 55 CCC 80


49. Bookkeeper 313 Center 79

50. Clerk Typist 51 B.R.A.C. 79 ($)




54. Offset Printer 213 Center 78

55. Electrician Helper 62 Center' 78


57. Draftsman 160 Center 76

58. Custodial Maint. 1,226 Center 75




62. Auto Eer. Repair 131 U.A.W. 73 ($)



65. Welder, Spot ,50 CCC 73



6.. Auto Body Repair 51 U.A.W. 72



71. Radio/TV Repair 47 Center 71


32.

29

ATTACHMENT I


UPPER GROUP


NUMBER OFTRAINEES


1. Autti-Parts Clerk 45 Center 1262.. Welder, Gas Metal

Arc. 60 Center 1163, Forklift Operator 27 Center 1134. Kitchen Helper* 32 Center/CCC 111

5. .Electronics Ass. 631 Center 1106. Security Guard 84 Center 1097. Machine Operator 82 Center 1088. Sheet Metal Worker 26 Center 1089. Warehouseman 180 Center 10610.Pest Control 42 Center 10311.Retail Sales Clerk 433 Center 10212. Insulation Worker 25 Center 101

13.Electrician 623 Center 9914.Dental Assistant 87 Center 9915.Cook, Short Order 54 Center 9916.Ward Clerk 188 Center 9817.Clerk, General 62 B.R.A.C. 9818.Teller 27 Center 9719.Clerk, General 598 Center 9620.Electronic Tech. 25 Thitrer21.Nurse's Assistant 3,067 Center 9422.Auto Service /Re-

pairer 981 Center 9423.Auto Service/Re-

pairer 222 CCC 9324.Cashier/Checker 161 Center 91 .

25.Diesel Mechanic 28 Center 91

26.Electrician 149 N.A.H.B. 9027.Landscaper 397 Center 8928.Auto Mechanic

Helper 562 Center 8829.Hosp. Diet. Aide 39 Center 8830.Clerk-Typist 3,154 Center 87

31.Brick/Stone Mason 45 CCC 8732.Autc Body Repair 777 Center 86

33.Painter 95 N.A.H.B. 86J4,Meat Cutter 71 Center 85

40-051 0--84---8

X Upper Standard Deviation LineMean Score 78

Standard Deviation 18

33

30

ATTACHMENT I

CODE KEY FOR TRAINING PROVIDERS

CODE EXPLANATION

AFL -CIO American Federation of Labor Congress

of Industrial Organizations

B.R.A.C. Brotherhood of Railway and AirlineClerks



I.B.P.A.T. International Brotherhood of Paintersand Allied Trades

I.M.I. International Masonry Institute

I.M.U. International Maritime Union ,

I.U.O.E. International Union of OperatingEngineers

N.A.H.B. National Association of Homebuilders

O.P. /C.M.I. Operation Plasterers and Cement Mason's

International Association

U.A.W. United Automobile Workers

U.B.C.J.A. United Brotherhood of Carpenters and

Joiners of,America

34

31

ATTACHMENT I


LOWER GROUP

RAINING OCCUPATIONFFECTIVENESS RANK

NUMBER OFTRAINEES


73. Service Stat. Att. 30 AFL-CIO 7074. Carpenter Const. 1,228 U.B.C.J.A. 69

75. Cement Mason 338 OPE/CMI 6976. Teacher/Nursery 124 Center 69

77. Combination Welder 44 AFL-CIO 6978. Engineer. Aide/ 30 I.U.O.E. 69 14)

79. Heavy Equip. Oper. 158 I.U.O.E. 68 ($)

80. Auto Mech. Helper 109 CCC 6881. Tilesetter 58 I.M.I. 68 ($)

82. Stock Clerk 85 CCC 67

83. Small Gas Eng. Rep. 67 Center 67

84. Calc. Mach. Oper. 47 Center 67 (&)

85. Deckhand 34 I.M.U. 67 (&)

86. Brick/Stone Mason 539 I.M.I. 65

87. Forestry/Conser. 127 CCC 6488. Cement Mason 52 Center 64

89. Medical Assistant 100 Center 6390. Painter 456 I.B.P.A.T. 62

91. Animal Caretaker 25 Center 62

92. Conts. Labor 93 CCC 693. Heavy Equip. Rep. 27 I.U.O.E. 61 ($)

94. Custodial Maint. 540 CCC 60

95. Railway Clerk 101 6.R.A.C. 59 ($) ( 096. Cook 646 CCC 57

97. Keypunch Operator 359 Center 57 (&)

98. Bakery 244 Center 57

99. Heavy Equip. Oper. 227 Center 56

100.DuplicatingMachine Operator 73 Center 55

101.Cement Mason 90 N.A.H.B. 54 ($)

102.Cosmetologist 67 Center 54

103.Plasterer 290 O.P.C.M.I 49 ($)

104.Medical Lab Ass't. 27 Center/AFL- 47

CIO105.Clerk-Typist 64 CCC 43 $

106.Stenographer 46 Center 41 &

107.Heavy Equip. 14. 75 Center 31 5

108.Mail Clerk 38 AFL-C10 29 $

XX

*Data on trainees from two procurement groups were added together to havea smaple of more than 25 trainees.$Cost Per Job Placement exceeds twice the National Average of 03,076.&Projected Absolute Growth of less than 1,000 new jobs between 1980-1990.


35

82

ATTACHMENT II

New Job Corps Training Offerings

A. CLERICAL AND SALES CLUSTER

1. Word Processing Machine Operator

2. Data Entry Operator

3. Bookkeeping/Billing Machine Operator

4. Payroll Clerk

5. Proof Machine Operator

B. ELECTRICIAL /APPLIANCE REPAIR

1. Office Machine Repairer

INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION

1. Production Painter

D.sHEALTH OCCUPATIONS

1. Emergency Medical Technician

2. Surgical Technician

3. X-Ray Technician

E. POTENTIAL HIGH TECHNOLOGY OCCUPATIONS

1. Computer and Peripheral EDP Equipment Operator

2. Computer Service Technician

361:

JOB CORPS

VOCATIONAL OFFERINGS REVIEW

Final Report

37

October 1983

ii11111111111-

FINAL REPORT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

I. INTRODUCTION 1

II. DATA COLLECTION 3

III. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS 5

A. Characteristics of Job Corps Enrollees 5

B. FY 82 Vocational ufferings, Outcomes, Cost and LaborMarket Prospe'ts 6

C. Assessment of the Relative Effectiveness of Current

Occupations 16,

D. Assessment of the Three Groups of Training Providers 20

E. New High Growth Occupations i4

IV. RECOMMENDATIONS' 29

TABLES

Table 1 The Largest Job Corps Training Occupations (FY 82) 7

Table 2 - Outcome and Growth Data for Job Corps Occupational

Training 11

Table 3 - Training Occupation Relative Effectiveness Rank 21

Table "4 - New Job Corps Training Offerings 27

38

.85

I. INTRODUCTION

This Final Report presents a summary of the major findings resulting

from the Job Corps Vocational Offerings Review at well as principal

recommendations.

Job Corps currently provides training in 120 recorded occupations.

Vocational offerings have changed over the program's 18 year history

in response to individual assessments of the effectiveness of particular

offerings at specific locations. This review represents the first

comprehensive national assessment of current vocational offerings in

light of their relative effectiveness -- outcomes and costs -- and

prospects in the overall labor market through the remainder of this

decade.

The purpose of the review was twofold: to evaluate the relative

effectiveness of current Job Corps vocational offerings and to identify

occupations suitable for addition o the Job Corps vocational curricula.

To accomplish this, attention was focused on (1) the extent to which

vocational training is aligned w th current and future labor market

demands, (2) the relative effect veness of occupational offerings and

(3) the advisability of replaci less effective training programs

with more effective or more pr ising training programs.

The review was not intended as n assessment of the crerall effectiveness

of the Job Corps program or vo ational training in Job Corps. The

overall effectiveness of the J ib Corps program has been addressed through

much more comprehensive, longilltudinally-based studies. This review is

39

36

restricted to (1) a comparison (with each other) of current training

occupations, including -- where it exists -- a differentiation within

occupations by major types of training providers, and (2) an analysis

of additional occupations which represent potential Job Corps offerings.

The basis for this approach.was to focus on increasing effectiveness.

Even though the major evaluation studies (e.g. "Evaluation of the

Economic Impact of the Job Corps Program," Mathematica Policy Research,

1982) show Job Cdrps.to be an effective education and training program

on an overall basis, effectiveness can be enhanced by:

. eliminating current offerings with relatively poor performance

and/or poor prospects in the labor market.

. retaining and/or expanding current offerings with relatively

superior performance and/or good prospects in the labor market.

. adding new occupations with good labor market prospects. _J

Thus, the review focuses'on internal comparisons of vocational offerings

and en examination of potential new occupations.

This final report summarizes and references seven "Documentation Reports."

They cover the (1) Job Corps vocational training activity in FY 1982,

(2) identification of high growth occupations which might be added to

those in which the Job Corps now trainsci, (3) assessme..t of training require-

ments for high demand occupations suitable for corpsmembers, (4) cost

analysis for FY 1982 training occupations, (5) ranking of relative

performance of occupational training, (6) decision making on what

occupations should be offered, and (7) options for further vocational

education offerings reviews.

II. pmsausgm,

The analysis focused on three groups ofdata; (1) demographic and

outcome data from the Job Corps Management Information System (MIS),

(2) cost data by training occupation collected from the centers and

national contractors, and (3) labor market\information from the

Bureau of Labor Statistics and the National\Occupational Information

Coordinating Committee.

The Job Corps Management Information System (NS) was the primary

source for demographic and outcome data. This system contains data

on Corpsmembers upon enrollment, at termination,and 3-6 months after

''termination from Job Corps. The MIS enrollment d4a is almost totally

complete. Information on over 96% of all youth whO enroll is present

in the enrollment database. The termination and post-terri nation

{placement) data are less complete, but still account for 80 -90% of the.

Job Corps population. Data from seven centers (3 of which were in

start-up or transition phases) were unavailable. In addition, those

occupations with fewer than 25 corpsmembers were not included in the

analysis. Not all of the data are specific to training occupations

and not all of the occupation-specific data are reliable. Problems

with the standardization of some of the variables in the termination

and .pladement file led to their elimination in rating, the relatiie

. effectivenessof Job Corps training occupations.

Characteristics 9f the corpsmembers; type, magnitude, and regional

dispersion of the training occupation; and outcomes of the training,

specifically, job placement outcomes, were examined closely.

3

41

88

The Job Corps Centers and National Contractors provided information

on training years and vocational costs for specific training occupations

--data used to calculate cost factors. .This effort was not an easy

task. Vocational costs had not been recorded at the specific

occupational level since the Job Corps financial reporting requirements

do not specify that accounting systems must maintain such data.

Therefore, these costs had to be estimated at the majority of the Job Corps

Centers.

National Occupational Information Coordinating Committee (NOICC) data

on the educational level and training time required for potential

new Job Corps training occupations was combined with Bureau of Labor

Statistics (BLS) data on the projected growth of relevant occupations

in actual numbers and percentages to identify occupations which were

within the capabilities of Job Corpsmembers. Further information on

potential additions to Job Corps was gleaned from the Occupational

. Outlook Handbook and other identified labor market information. These

data were used to identify new occupations which could be projected to

do well in the Job Corps environment for the next decade and to determine

which existing Job Corps occupations would continue to do well.

Achieving the ideal in measurement and analysis is rarely realized.

This study was limited in scope by the time and available data. However,

much new information was obtained about Job Corps vocational offerings.

This review provides the most comprehensive analysis of the Job Corps

vocational program to date. The following pages summarize the findings

and recommendations of the Vocational Offerings Review. More detailed

42

89

and substantial information on each of the topics discussed here is

available in the bulk of the antlysis which is contained in Documenta-

ionfleports 1 through 7.

III. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

A. Characteristics of Job Corps Enrolleks,

During FY 1982, Job Corps enrolled over 52,000 corpsmembers at

105 centers in 43 states and Puerto Rico. Slightly over one-half of

the FY 1982 enrollees were assigned to Job Corps centers in their home

state. After leaving Job Corps, at least 15 percent of the trainees

relocate fn a new locality' instead of returning to their earlier

residence. This information substantiates the fact that Job Corps, as

a nationwide training program, provides service to locales beyond the

borders of the local Job Corps training areas. It also makes the job

of aligning training, offerings with occupational employment demands in

relevant labor markets very difficult at some centers.

Of the 52,902 recorded new Job Corps enrollees, 62 percent were male and

38 percent were female. Fifty-five percent of the corpsmembers were

black, 30 percent white, 8.2 percent Hispania;, 3.6 percent American Indian,

and 3 percent Asian and Pacific Islander.. Nineteen percent of the

enrollees had completed 12 or more years of schooling and a similar

er

percentage coOd read at over 8th grade level. W le only 4.7 percent

had completed 7 or fewer grades of school, otpor,alf could not read at

the 7th grade level. The median school year completed was 10 and the

median grade reading level was about 6. (See Documentation Report No. 1

for regional breakdowns.)

5

43

40

B. FY-82 Vocational Offerin s Outcomes Costs and Labor MarketWespects

1. Occupations

Job Corps provided training in 120 recorded occupations to corps-

members who were enrolled at least 90 days and who terminated in FY 1982.

Eighty of the training occupations had at least 25 trainees who had

been in Job Corps 90 days or longer.. The largest 8 occupations

accounted for 57.9 percent (18,568) of the 32,033 90 day + terminees.

As' Table 1 illustrates, during FY 1982, over 1,000 trainees were

enrolled in each of the 8 largest occupations, led by clerk typist at

3,269. The largest twenty-two training occupations accounted for 84

percent of the 90 days + terminees. In each, at least 300 corpsmembers

received training.

Table 1 also shows the percentage of males and females enrolled

each of the 22 largest Job Corps occupations. Six of these had

predominantly female enrollment -- clerk typist; nurse's assistant;

clerk, general; retail sales clerk, keypunch operator; and bookkeeper.

An examination of females enrollments revealed that Job Corps trains

o relatively high percentage of women in non-traditional occupations.

For example, 18 percent of the trainees in the nainter program are

women. Likewise, 12.8 percent of those training to become electricians

were women, (compared to 4.1 percent in Vocational Education programs

nationally I) in addition to 11.9 percent in custodial maintenance,

8.5 percent in Auto Mechanic Helper and 8.1 percent in Auto Body Repair.

U.S. Dept. of Labor, National Center for Education Statistics,Vocational Education Data System.

6

44

41

TABLE 1

The Largest Job Corps Training Occupations (FY 1982)

-----RZgirrrr-ea neTraining Occupation :1400 Days Percent Male Percent Female

Clerk Typist 3,269 17.7 82.3Nurse's Assistant 3,081 15.7 84.3

Combination Welder 2,854 93.6 6.4Cook 2,600 61.8 38.2Carpenter 2,121 92.3 7.1

Custodial Maintenance 1,998 88.1 11.9Auto Service Repairer 1,334 94.3 5.7

Brick and Stone Mason 1,311 96.0 4.0

Painter 982 82.0 18.0

Auto Body Repair 841 91.9 8.1

Electrician 793 87.2 12.8

Clerk, General 678 18.7 81.3

Auto Mechanic Helper 674 91.5 8.5

Welder, Spot 651 90.0 10.0

Electronic Assembler 631 61.6 38.4

Cement Meson, 585 94.5 5.5

PlUmber 508 96.3 3.7

Retail Sales Clerk 433 32.1 67.9

Landscaper 423 79.1 20.9

Heavy Equipment Operator 384 94.0 6.0

Keypunch Operator 370 22.B 77.2

Bookkeeper 313 33.2 66.8

7

45

42

Job Corps provides-new corpsmembers with an opportunity to survey all

center vocations through its Occupational Exploration Program. All

corpsmembers have free access to entry into any occupation for which

. they have the requisite reading and math levels. Corpsmembees also

have the option of changing vocational areas after program entry, and

some choose to train in more than one occupation while in Job Corps.

2. Outcomes

Since the focus of this review was to .assess vocational offerings,

outcome data are restricted to reported terminees who were enrolled

at least 90 days and, thus, had at least some opportunity to receive

vocational training. Outcome dal. for these terminees is presented for

two measures -- percent job place( and average wage at job entry. The

job placement measure is defined differently from other job placement

measures used in Job Corps to assess centers and overall program

performance. Depending on the purpose -- i.e., what aspects of

performance are being.assessed -- a variety of measures are used.

The placement rate measure used in this review shows artificially low

numbers compared to other related measures since it:

. does not include placements in the military

. does not include placements in further education and training

such as vocational/technical schools, community colleges, and

colleges.

. includes incomplete records for terminees whom placement

agencies could not locate and who may have obtained jobs.

8

46

43

. focuses only on terminees who stayed at least 90 days. .

. excludes occupationswith less than 25 terminees recorded in FY 82

. includes all such terminees whether or not those terminees

were available fir placement

The most broadly defined measure -- those placed in jobs, military or

school as a percent of terminees available for placement -- shows a

success rate of 86.6% for FY 82, A more restricted measure -- those

placed in jobs as a percent of terminees available for placement- -

showed 57.4%/for FY 82. Even including those not available for pine-

ment, the overall job placement rate reported for FY 82 was t:1.6%.

The data restrictions placed on the measure used in the vocational

review result in a 46.7% placement rate. While this undoubtedly

understates thv overall success rate for the program, the definition was

consistently applied to the specific occupations and provides an

adequate basis for comparative analysis of the existing offerings.

One caveat to the usefulness of the restricted measure applies to

occupations with predominantly female enrollment. Job placement in

some of the large occupations with primarily female enrollment was

lower than that for some programs with primarily male enrollment. These

results are at least partially due to the method of computing job.

placement rates in this study. Since, historically, many more ex-

corpswomen leave the labor force upon termination than do corpsmen,

the use of all terminees as the computational base instead of those

available for placement undoubtedly yields relatively lower job placement

rates for females.

47

,,11.

Table 2 provides overall outcomes for each occupation by major

training provider in terms of (1) the two major outcome measures --

placement rate and job entry wage, (2) the two cost measures--cost per

job placement and cost per training year, and (3) labor market measures- -

absolute and percent growth of the occupation. Other outcome measures,

such as completion rates, training related placements and related

measures, were considered and rejected due to data availability problems

and other factors as discussed more fully in Documentation Report 1.

Occupational job placement rates varied from a high of 88% for

Electronic Technicians to a low of 13% for mail clerk. Average wage at

job entry varied from a high of $6.39 per hour for a clerk typist

trained by a national contractor to a low of $3.35 per hour for

Hospital. Dietary Aide trained by center operators.

Documentation Reports 1 and 5 discuss these outcomes in more detail.

The use of these outcome measures in assessing relative effectiveness

as well as differences in training providers are summarized in Section

C of this Final Report.

3. Costs

Table 2 also provides the direct training costs for each occupa-

tion by training provider in terms of two measures cost per training

year and cost per job placement. Cost per training year ranged from

a high of $8,923 for Engineer Aide/Rodman trained by a national

contractor to $458 for Teller trained by center operators. Cost per

placement ranged from a high of $13,384 for Engineer Aide/Rodman trained

by a national contractor to $607 for Pest Control trained by center

operators.

10

48

TABLE 2

OOTCONR AND GROWTH DATA roR JOB CORPS OCCUPATIORAL TRAINING

I.AoR1 or S

10 .' -1.11 s`. '1*

JCS MICR)

.1 ,,''r.

WAGE CV JOS...;

PUICaI Tei. ',

MINIM "ICAR, ,.fi

Ihirlsofassiong

Craftaran Canter 160 45.0 $ 4.11 $ 2,637 $1,124 17,000 27.8Cramsto109imt Cantor 67 47.7 3.64 3,651 1,358 27,453 11.1Ins. Aids/lainn I.0.0.1. 30 66.6 4.61 13,384 8,923 74,369 18.6Mac/sonic Tech. Center 25 88.0 6.19 3,552 3,006 109,000 29.1Prof. hag. Aide Colter 42 38.0 3.89 959 480 21,811 17.2

Clarinktoddo

Clark Typist Center 3,154 36.2 ,, 3.77 1,763 551 184,000 17.5Clerk Typist CCC 64 J5.9 3.71 6,666 1,503 114,000 17.5Clerk Typist B.R.A.C. 51 80.3 6.39 7,780 3,017 184,000 17.5Cmp1. ma. Opr. Cantor 73 21.9 3.59 1,947 779 4,564 13.6RayassilOpr. Canter 359 42.6 3.90 2,404 971 -31,420 -9.7Stotk C14sk CCC 85 50.5 4.11 4,817 3,046 142,000 17.4Retail Salsa Clark Canter 433 43.6 3.51 1,215 5118 465,000 17.7Poccuntiny Mark Canter 276 44.9 3.91 2,095 689 94,000 13.3farrstaxy antis 69 49.2 3.50 4,409 1,189 ' 0,0004 29.2ookkseper Center 313 38.3 3.75 2,148 633 168,000 111.8

CAW. Mach. Ors. Center 17 34.0 3.47 1,305 596 885 17.3Mil Clswk Aril= 38 13.1 3.39 10,046 2,092 13,405 16.7Caddar/Chsclar Cantor 161 14.7 3.60 1,520 545 446,000 21.7Clark, Catered Canter 598 42.4 3.89 1,340 606 366,000 0.4Clark, Omura 8.1.A.C. 62 67.0 4.45 2,556 3,158 366,000 15.4Rasptianist Canter 144 35.4 3.65 2,012 622 17,000 24.6Taller Cantor 27 10.7 3.87 1,201 ISO 108,000 25.3Stanosrsphar Corder 46 32.6 3.71 4,780 658 -25,317 -9.1Mara Clerk Camber 181 44.1 3,73 1,575 S81 366,800 15.4Reilwayclerk O.R.A.C. 101 70.2 5.93 1.566 4,138 - 1,035 -18.6

0.

49

PPM 2 oweTABLE 2

OUTCONZ AND GROWTH DATA' FOR JOB CORPS OCCUPATIONAL TRAINING

I a' .11 '..-

PROVIMER

"i' r.. .JOB P1J

vr.1011E CP JOB

..r.

PLIC0t29r

i.TNUNIND TEAR

"..,..1 of

Moire.. -1,.. .

services 00CMP.

Oletodial Paint. Center 1,226 42.4 6 3.92 6 2,767 61,060 491,000 11.3Custodial Mint. CCC 540 46.6 3.15 5,262 2,516 491,000 11.3Ontodial Paint. N.A.M.B. 232 59.0 3.72 4,440 1,601 491,000 11.3Security Carol Center 14 60.7 3.75 1,100 927 152,000 23.6Tocher, NUreery Center 124 30.6 3.40 1,605 1,245 71,054 11.0Anima Centel= Center 25 56.0 4.15 3,277 3,277 10,222 U.S

1mu3tompar Center 397 47.6 3.84 1,010 165 73,611 14.0Vbrestry s Q. ccc 127 57.4 3.69 2,626 1,976 1,512 12.1Peet Control Center 42 57.1 3.76 600 633 1,097 31.6

Vtrd Sereboe

cultic 31 51.6 3.35 2,174 2,174 361,000 21.4tbiteryMbltreeme

Cook Comber 1,940 39.2 3.65 1,737 711 $6,720 23.1Cook CcC 646 48.6 3.87 5,166 2,617 16,720 15.1Baas Center 244 45.6 3.77 2,331 069 9,750 21.1Nest Cutter Cents.: 71 56.1 4.05 2,321 1,037 23,923 13.5Cbok, Mort Order Cents- 54 62.6 1.76 1,159 2,107 93,000 21.4Ritchenftdper Cents MCC* 32 61.7 3.01 1,822 1,145 231,000 27.7

Pato/Neds. Rep.

Auto Pluck Helper S62 41.2 3,65 2,424 196 209,000 22.0Auto Nick. Helper . 109 47.7 3.74 3,129 1,671 209,000 22.0Auto Service/Nopeineen Center so 1 47.6 3.84 1,731 758 176,000 26.0Auto Setviceinepalreen CcC 222 56.1 4.12 2,611 1,755 176,000 26.0Auto Ilervioelempeineen A.M. 131 59.5 4.45 7,777 3,019 176,000 26.0Beal Cal Ens. Repairmen . . 67 43.2 4.60 2,971 653 21,231 13.7Auto Body Pepeitmen tenter 777 41.3 3.67 1,136 727 23,324 20.4Auto Body Repairman .A.M. 51 70.5 4.54 5,457 3,630 23,324 20,4

f"

11. V 0 it %.# .....,

TABLit 2

OUTCOMB AND GROWN DATA POR JOB CORPS OCCUPATIONAL ?MAIMING

PAGE 3 yr 3

,,,

O."NO i't 'f':,

JCS Man NM CP JOB1: ..

,

Ana:04mA. Ilea. front'd...1

Ante Ports Clerk Center 45 64.4 4 3.86 0 1,054 4 577 445,000 17.7Vins. Stet. Atteds*, Center 121 47.9 3.74 2,565 1,055 74,100 19.0Nev. Stat. Atlawait.Diesel NeChenic \

AtmCIOCenter

3024

40,060.7

3.694.09

2,1472,836

9201,303

74,10038,438

19.022.6Wire, Blip. it Canter 75 40.0 4.02 1,271 2,484 10,003 11.2Nervy &alp. Weir I.U.O.B. 27 65.1 4.53 8,891 5,680 10,003 11.2

COneOnact.koltedee

Center 693 43.1 3.79 2,742 907 119,000 17.1center Oznetruction

Carpenter Constructiso N.A.N.B. 220 54.1 3.94 3,824 1,463 119,000 17.1Comber Oustsur Inn 0.B.C.J.A. 1,228 57.9 4.70 1,117 3,968 119,000 17.8electrician Center 623 47.8 3.94 1,644 666 90,000 17.9Ilectrinius N.A.H.B 149 67.8 4.13 3,791 1,4504 90,000 17,9Cement Mown Canter 52 42.3 3.68 3,018 1,185 37,094 35.9Owent.Meeon cCe 55 65.4 3.93 3,945 2,449 37,098 35.9Count Munn N.A.U.B. 90 42.2 4.43 6.567 1,965 37,098 35.9Creme Mason MOD 338 56.2 4.69 5,801 2,662 37,094 35.9Drink/Stow Munn Center 639 40.2 3.74 1,835 764 33,975 32.2Brick/Sterne Paean CCC 45 62.2 4.04 3,559 1,748 33,975 32.2Bridt/Stcen Meson N.A.H.B. se 54.6 4.02 4,879 1,436 33,975 32.2Brirk/Btarts Nunn i.e.!. 539 52.6 4.53 6,069 2,112 33,075 32.2Painter Center 431 42.6 3.69 1,290 775 33,440 14.8Painter N.A.H.B. 95 54.9 4.02 2,397 1,401 33,440 14.8Pointer r.B.P.A.T. 456 56.3 4.53 6,31111 2,970 13,840 14.8Heavy Buis. Cceastnr center 227 49.3 4.36 5,436 2,863 72,663 47.3Newry Equip. Operator I.U.O.F. 118 67.7 5.14 11,337 6.311 72,643 17.3Plod= Center 271 50.1 3.62 2,426 958 71,809 20.9Pltriber N.A. N.B. 209 60.2 4.21 4,008 1,906 71,805 20.9Mutterer . ' LOCI 290 56.1 4.77 6,928 2,124 1,6391

10.0

, (3 1

I.

TABLE 2

°OTC= AND GROWN DATA FOR JOS CORPS OCCUPATIONAL TRAINING

PPM 40f 5

Woe'MIMS 'In' CtPIOVmOI

11TPADIA.....A111 PIA= VACS Of JCS

$..PIKTleQ

O. A

ITADAN1 TSAR' ..11

Owstruoticn Trades (=it'd...)

Tibeeettar I.N.I. 50 .0.3 0 4.10 t 6,313 $2,604 5,099 33.4Comet. Labor CCC 93 55.9 3.89 5,493 3,203 250,000 10.4Welder, Spot Center 601 39.6 4.19 2,265 124 107,000 20.0Valdes, Spot CCC 50 56.0 4.51 4,493 2,796 107,000 20.0Floor Layer 34 52.9 5.02 3,740 1,464 6,320 31.5berulationitmtar

alectricelAPPlisnow Pamir

Center

cantor

25

245

52.0

46.1

3.90

3.72

1,499

1,673

407

909

12,977

30.309

30.6

20.4kirtt:Wrd. Pal. NwhotloElev. Appl. allainnin Cents 103 49.5 3.13 1,643 680 3.921 7.9Pr "o/1V hapeirmat Center 47 42.3 1.2e 2,570 619 13,506 26.2.actricien Wiper Center 62 41.9 3.35 2,453 717 209,000 22.0Solar Iftsealier N.A.H.S. 131 72.2 !.52 3,140 1,004 9,500 10.6Talsormmesioations ArboCSO 56 40.2 Jstu 2,214 996 11,515 15.4

Industrial ProSection

Whine Operator Canter 62 70.0 4.87 1,711 103 29,060 17.1Crab. Welder Center 1,080 50.2 4.43 2,329 960 107,000 20.0Crab. weldor CCC 44 SI., 4.40 3,250 2,330 107,000 20.0Code. Welder AFL.CD, 44 50.9 4.49 3,306 1,451 107,000 20.0MustNetel abr. Pinar 26 61 5 4.20 1,479 699 33,070 15.6Furniture Upholsterer Pinter 60 54.5 3.73 2,070 828 1,331 10.6Blactronica Aitawblet Center 631 54.0 3.94 1,116 711 241,000 19.0Offset hinter Oster 213 60.0 4.07 2,567 1,341 11.272 14.3Nadi GNI Arc Center 60 61.6 4.27 1,022 995 107,000 20.0etethine Opar. laths Cents 45 57.7 3.01 2,256 1,022 29,404 16.1Nectilnist Center 07 57.4 4.27 2,325 1,006 44,255 16.1

fits on tseVra Emu two proaassentprockca amyl, of wore than 2S

group. werethese

aided to

Statistics not evaileble f11311 MI figure shorn ila best satinetsof Marvin cetron, avert in labor market information

11M. ,

TABLE 2

OUTCONZ AND GROWTH DATA FOR JCS CORPS OCCUPATIONAL TRA/NIN.

PAGZ 507 5

117LL1INe

OCCUPATIONWO,.FROMM

iii., I.,'Jun PIA=

T.''1.mon or JOB

IC. , iPLIICDOff

v:TRAININ3 YEKR

Transportation

CenterCedarI.M.U.

centerCenterCenterCenterCanter

/AFL-CIO

groupstrainees.

1802734

3,06787

76

3910027

58.366.682.4

37.9

59.7

53.941.041.0

18.5

/..

$ 4.004.315.65

3.604.025.043.353.953.47

53

81,0001,1634,677

1,6451,9574,9541,3723,4925,537

$ 724

8373,446

656

1,0821,813665 '

974

814

43,47059,356

726

506,00054,360

177,000110,00026,447

31,040

12.214.82.1

jj

43.3

39.634.9

18.4.

29.835.4

harshommemmFOrklift OperatorDeciderd

Width Occupations

Parse AssistantDental AssistantLic. Prac. famesHosp. Dist AddsMsdicsl Asst.

I. Lob. Tech.

'Data an trainees from two

to Provide a swage of more than 2

C.

The selection of these measures as well as other cost measures

considered is discussed iq DocumentatiokReport 4. Documentation

Reports 4 and 5 discuss these outcomes in detail. The use of.these

outcome measures in assessing overall relative effectiveness as well as

differences fn training providers are summarized in Section C of this

Final Report,

4. csta_pLaborMarlosects

Table 2 also provides two measures of labor market prospects

for each of the current Job Corps occupations -- absolute growth in

numbers employed from 1980 to 1990 and percentage growth for the same

period. When ranked in terms of the absolute growth in the number of

jobs for the periOd 1980-1990, the top decile included several

clerical, retail and medical occupations. The bottom decile had a

variety of unrelated occupations. When training occupations were ranked

and broken into deciles on percentage growth, the top decile contained

4 medical occupations and 3 construction occupations. The bottom decile

had unrelated occupations similar to those in the absolute growth ranked

list.

Documentation Repoma 2 and 3 discuss the identification of high demand

occupations. Documentation Report 5 and Section C of this Final

Report discuss the use of labor market measures in assessing relative

effectiveness of the occupations currently offered.

C. Assessment of the Relative Effectiveness of Current Occupations

One,of the main purposes of the Vocational Offerings Review Project

was the assess the relative or comparative effectiveness of the training

54

16

51

occupations within JobCorps; which occupations have been

more successful in the Job Corps environment and which have been lest

successful. The project was limited in the number and type of variables,.

that could be'used as criteria to assess relative. effectiveness. The

six. criteria 'shown in table 2 were chosen because they represent a

ba,ance between performance measures,tcost measures, and future

placement potential. All 80 Job Corps training occupations with more

than 25 FY 1982 trainees enrolled in Job Corps for 90 or more days,

were rated on (1) Job Placement Percent, (2) Average Wage at. Job Entry,

(3) Cost Per Training Year, (4) Cost Per Job Placement, (5) Absolute

Employment Growth from 1980-1990, and (6) Percentage Employment Growth

from 1980-1990. there was no attempt to'measure prestige of training

occupations or other value or quality-of-life oriented variables

that may be related toJhe relative effectiveness of training occupa-

tions but that are based on value judgements,.

_ The two cost variables, cost per Sob placement and cost per training

year, were basic units of comparison between the training occupations

within JO!) Corps. Use of these variables was not intended to provide

a cost/benefit analysis. They were derived from di4iding the total

vocational training costs in each training.occUpation by the amount of

time spent in training (training years) and the number of job place-

ments they produce (cost per job placement). These costs did not

include capital costs (equipment, facilitiet, etc.) or management/

support costs (administration, security, etc.) and there was no

attempt to measure, the difference in quality of instruction provided.

17

55

7

52

When there wits more than one group providirq training in an occupa-

tion, i.e., center staff, civilian conservation staff, or national

contractors, data for these groups were separated to produce differing

ratings for a training occupation based on the training provider.

There were 108 training "occupations" rated by this analysis after

the original 80 were separated by training provider.

The raw data collectdd in the analysis of Job Corps training occupa-

'dons were used to determine a relative (comparative) assessment of

individual occupations rather than an absolute judgement of each.

As indicated earlier, these data were collected from 99 of the 105

current Job Corps Centers. Training occupations with too few trainees

to compare adequately with larger, more established training occupa-

tions were eliminated from the analysis. The overall results (raw

data) generally understated Job Corps' overall performance on these

criteria because the most restricted and conservative measures of

performance were used at all times. However, these artificially

low numbers were used because it was not the individual ,erformance of the

training occupations but rather their effectiveness r, compared to

the other occupations in Job Corps which was the research issue under

study.

Training occupations were scored by ranking them on each of the six

criteria and awarding points from one to ten depending on how positive

their ranking was on each criterion. Each of the criteria was weighted

\ according to those considered most important for judging training

56

18

r

occupation effectiveness in Job Corps by Job Corps national managers

prior to the scoring. Figure 1 shows the weights of the six rating

variables as they were assigned by the Job Corps managers.

FIGURE 1

WEIGHTS OF VARIABLES

CRITERIA WEIGHT

1. Percent Job Placed. 4

2. Average Wage of Job

3. Cost Per Job Placement 4

4. Cost Per Training Year 2

5. Absolute Employment Growth, 1980-1990 2

6. Percentage Employment Growth, 1980-1990 1

Rank scores (deciles) for each training occupation were multiplied by

the weight assigned to each of the six ranking variables to produce a

weighted score for each current Job Corps training occupation. Value

judgements are inherent in any weighting system; therefore, the results

of this weighting scheme were checked against scores with no weights

computed. The final ranked list produced by the weighted scoring

provided similar results to the ranked list produced by unweighted

scoring (see Table V-C, Domenthtion Report No. 5). The result

indicates that the weights provided by the Job Corps managers were

relatively balanced between outcomes measures and cost variables;

slightly less emphasis was placed on labor market projections in the

weighted scheme, causing some shifts.

19

57

Table 3 presents the 108 training occupationi (80 occupations

separated by training provider) ranked according to their total weighted

score on the rating. The mean score on this list was 78 with a standard

deviation score of 18. The list was divided into upper, middle and

lower groups with lines drawn to indicate scores that were more than

one standard deviation above and below the mean.' Some of the occupa-

tions have a dollar sign ($) or an ampersand (&) after their score.

Those with the dollar sign have been flagged for having cost per job

placement exceeding twice the national average of $3,076. per job

placement. Those with the ampersand have been flagged for having

negative growth (less than 1000) employment ijcrease in the decade of

the 1980's.

Auto Parts Clerk received the highest score based on the six weighted

criteria followed by Welder, Gas Metal Arc and Forklift Operator. Of

the nineteen training occupations above the upper standard deviation line,

six were clerical. Of the sixteen below the lower standard deviation

line, six were also clerical. No clear pattern emerged about which types

of training occupations were consistently more effective.

D. Assessment of the Three Gumalialining Providers

Definite differences were noted on the effectiveness criteria

for National Contractors, Centers, and.CCCs. Generally speaking, the

'National Contractors had the highest job placement rates and the

highest entry wages. Contract Centers had the lowest cost per training

year and cost per job placement. Civilian Conservation Centers ranked

in the middle of these two groups on these four variables,

20

58

55

TABLE 3

TRAINING OCCUPATION RELATIVE' EFFECTIVENESS RANK

UPPER GROUP

RAINING OCCUPATIONEFFECTIVENESS RANK

NUMBER OFTRAINEES


1. Auto Parts Clerk 45 Center 1262. Welder, Gas Metal

Arc. 60 Center 1163. Forklift Operator 27 Center 1134. Kitchen Helper* 32 Center/CCC 1115. Electronics Ass. 631 Center 1106. Security Guard 84 Center 1097. Machine Operator 82 Center 1088. Sheet Metal Worker 26 Center 1089. Warehouseman 180 Center 10610.Pest Control 42 Center' 10311.Retail Sales Clerk 433 Center 10212. Insulation Worker 25 Center 10113.Electrician 623 Center 9914.Dental Assistant 87 Center 9915.Cook, Short Order 54 Center 9916.Ward Clerk 188 Center 9817.Clerk, General 62 B.R.A.C. 9818.Teller 27 Center 9719.Clerk, General 598 Center 9620.Elect?onic 'Tech. 25 Center 921.Nurse's Assistant 3,067 Center 942Z.Auto Service/Re-

pairer 981 Center 9423.Auto Service/Re-'

pairer 222 CCC 9324.Cashier/Checker 161 Center 9125. Diesel Mechanic 28 Center 91

26.Electrician 149 N.A.H.B. 9027.Landscaper 397 Center 8928.Auto Mechanic

Helper 562 Center 8829.Hosp. Diet. Aide 39 Center 8830.Clerk-Typist 3,154 Center 8731.Brick/Stone Mason 45 CCC 8732.Auto Body Repair 777 Center 8633.Painter 95 N.A.H.B. 8634.Meat Cutter 71 Center 85

AL

X Upper Standard Deviation LineMean Score 78

Standard Deviation 18

21

56

TABLE 3


MIDDLE GROUP


NUMBER OFTRAINEES


35. Combination Welder 1,880 Center 84


37. Machinist 87 Center 84 .



40. Flectricial Appl. 103 Center 83

41. Machine Operator,Lathe 45 Center 83





46. Licensed Prac.Nurse 76 Center 80

47. Cement Mason 55 CCC 80


49. Bookkeeper 313 Center 79

50. Clerk Typist 51 B.R.A.C. 79 ($)




54. Offset Printer 213 Center 78

55. Electrician Helper 62 Center 78


57. Draftsman 160 Center 76

58. Custodial Maint. 1,226 Center 75




62. Auto Ser. Repair 131 U.A.W. 73 ($)



65. Welder, Spot 50 CCC 73



68. Auto Jody Repair 51 U.A.W. 72



71. Radio/TV Repair 47 Center 71


22

C

57

TABLE 3


LOWER GROUP


NUMBER OFTRAINEES


73. Service Stat. Att. 20 AFL-CIO 7074. Carpenter Const. 1,228 U.B.C.J.A. 6975. Cement Mason 338 OPE/CMI 6976. Teacher/Nursery 124 Center 6977. Combination Welder 44 AFL-CIO 6978. Engineer Aide/ 30 I.U.O.E. 69 ($)79. Heavy Equip. Oper. 158 I.U.O.E. 68 ($)80. Auto Mech. Helper 109 CCC 6881. Tilesetter 58 I.M.I. 68 (8)82. Stock Clerk 85 CCC 6783. Small Gas Eng. Rep. 67 Center 6784. Calc. Mach. Oper. 47 Center 67 (&)85. Deckhand 34 I.M.U. 67 (&)86. Brick/Stone Mason 539 I.M.I. 6587. Forestry/Conser. 127 CCC 6488. Cement Mason 52 Center 6489. Medical Assistant 100 Center 6390. Painter 456 I.B.P.A.T. 6291. Animal Caretaker 25 Center 6292. Conts. Labor 93 CCC 6293. Heavy Equip. Rep. 27 I.U.O.E. 61 ($)94. Custodial Maint. 540 CCC 6095. Railway Cier 0 OR. .

96. Cook 646 CCC 5797. Keypunch Operator 359 Center 57 (&)98. Baker 244 Center 5799. Heavy Equip. Oper. 227 Center 56100. Duplicating

Machine Operator 73 Center 55101.Cement Mason 90 N.A.H.B. 54 ($)102.Cosmetologist 67 tenter 54'103.Plasterer 290 O.P.C.M.I 49 ($)104.Medical Lab Ass't. 27 Center/AFL- 47

CIO105.Clerk-Typist 64 CCC 43 ($)106.Stenographer 46 Center 41 (8107.Hemy Equip, Rep. 75 Ce.iter 31 ($108.Mail Clerk 38 AFL-CIO 29 ($

*Data on trainees from two procurement groups were added together to havea smaple of more than 25 trainees.

$Cost Per Job Placement exceeds twice the National Average of #3,076.&Projected Absolute Growth of less than 1,000 new jobs between 1980-1990.


Pl

6F

X

6.

58

TABLE C

ODE KEY FOR TRAINING PROVIDERS

CODE EXPLANATION

AFL-CIO American Federation of Labor Congress

of Industrial Organizations

B.R.A.C. Brotherhood of Railway and Airline

Clerks



I.B.P.A.T. International Brotherhood of Painters

and Allied Trades

I.M.I. International Masonry Institute

I.M.U. International Maritime Union

I.U.O.E. International Union of OperatingEngineers

N.A.H.B. National Association of Homebuilders

O.P. /C.M.I. Operation Plasterers and Cement Mason's.

International Association

U.A.W. United Automobile Workers

U.B.C.J.A. United Brotherhood of Carpenters and

Joiners of America

62

59

When all the training occupations were scored using all six criteria

as measures of relative effectiveness within Job Corps, some patterns

were noted. The upper group was dominated by center trained occupa-

tions. Out of the top 34 occupations,28 were center trained.

In contrast, out of the bottom 36 occupations, only 13 were center

trained. There were a dispropohtionate number of nationally contracted

training occupations in the lower group (15 out of 27). Civilian

Conservation Center programs had a similar proportion of their

training occupations in the bottom group (7 out of 12) on this

comparative scale. Generally, center training occupations did better

. than the other two groups on this set of rating criteria.

E. New High Growth Occupations

The Vocational Offerings Review Project studied labor

force projections from BLS and labor market information from NOICC and

BLS to choose new occupations that may be suitable for addition to Job

Corps vocational offerings. All 670 occupations in BLS's publicly

available projections of employment changes 1980-1990 were screened for

the reading level required to learn the skills of the occupation and

the length of specific vocational preparation they require. About one-

half met the Screening criteria and a substantial majority of these

"high employment growth" occupations are currently being taught in Job

Corps. The Job Corps vocational training is already fairly well targeted

to labor market demand.

24

63

60

Occupations in which Job Corps is currently not training or is

providing training to fewer than 25 corpsmembers were selected from the

initial BLS list for further evaluation. Each of those occupations was

evaluated using the following criteria:

(1) Absolute change in numbers employed in projected to increase

10:000 or more by 1990,

(2) Percent growth is projected to be at least 18.5% from 1980 to

1990.

(3) The occupation requires an educational level of twelfth

grade or less,

(4) The occupation requires a training time of two years or less,

(5) Employer hiring practices, including age requirements and

preferred education and training levels, are commensurate

with corpsmember experiences and,

(6) The occupation was recommended by a panel of Job Corps

employees who hrve knowledge of corpsmembers and of current

Job Corps vocational training programs.

Occupations meeting at least five of the criteria were selected for

further consideration as new Job Corps training offerings.

Table 7 lists the recommended "new" occupations. The list is not long

because Job Corps is already providing training in most of the

high growth occupations suited to corpsmembers' ability levels. Job

Corps is currently not providing training in sixty-one occupations

identified as having growth potential. Of these, twelve were identifi-

ed as suitable for consideration as new Job Corps training programs.

25

64

61

Factors such as hiring biases in the labor market (e.g., age or

educational preferences of employers)Alittle or no training time, or

inappropriateness to Job Corps environment screened out all other

occupations. The recommended new occupations encompass several Job

Corps training clusters.

Proposed new training offerings which appear promising in the business/

clerical program area include Word Processing Machine Operator, Data Entry

Operator, Bookkeeping Machine Operator, Proof Machine Operator, and

Payrol, Clerk. Individuals who can operate word processing machines

and perform data entry operations on computer terminals are currently

in demand. Continued good job prospects are expected in the coming

years. Many employees now prefer clerical applicants with word

processing or data entry experience; some require it. Just as the

electric typewriter superseded manual typewriters, word processing

machines and computer terminals are now becoming standard office equip-

ment. Bookkeeping Clerk occupations are expected to grow slightly

faster than the average for all occupations in the coming decade.

Clerks are needed to operate electronic machines and perform data entry

tasks.

Possible additions to the training offerings in the Job Corps health

occupations include Emergency Medical Technicians, Surgical Technicians,

and X-Ray Technicians. All three occupations are expected to increase

in numbers. All of these health offerings require certification or

licensing on a state and/or a national level.

40-01 0-144----1,

62

TABLE 4

New Job Corps Training Offerings

A. CLERICAL AND SALES CLUSTER

1. Word Processing Machine Operator

2. Data Entry Operator

3. Bookkeeping/Billing Machine Operator

4. Payroll Clerk

5. Proof Machine Operator

/B. ELECTRICIAL/APPLIANCE REPAIR

1. Office Machine Repairer

C. INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION

1. Production Painter

D. HEALTH OCCUPATIONS

1. Emergency Medical Technician

2. Surgical Technician

3. X-Ray Technician

E. POTENTIAL HIGH TECHNOLOGY OCCUPATIONS

1. Computer and Peripheral EDP Equipment Operator

2. Computer Service Technician

66

63

In the area of industrial production and repair, Office Machine Repairer

appears to be a promising field during the coming years. As new types

of office machines are being installed, they must be serviced and

maintained., Also, the occupation of Industrial Production Painter is

projected to increase during the 1980's. Demand for this occupation

may vary according to geographic location.

Finally, possible high technology additions to Job Corps programs

include the Computer Operator and Computer Service Technician Occupa-

tions. The need for computer operators is projected to increase over

70 percent in the coming decade, as more and more firms invest in

computers. The training time required is within Job Corpemandate,

and opportunities for further training and advancement would be avail-

able to many people employed in this field. The need for Computer

Service Technicians is also projected to increase over 70 percent in

the next ten years. Opportunities for individuals who can repair and

service computers appear to be excellent, and advancement potential

is good.

Inasmuch as training in these computer-related occupations is likely

to involve substantial training equipment capital costs, Job Corps

training should be undertaken in them on a controlled experimental and

demonstration basis until their viability in Job Corps is established

and it can be determined how best to arrange for such training.

Specific recommendations for delivering training in these occupations

are contained in Documentation Report 6.

64

IV. RECOMMENDATIONS

The preceding sections of the report have set forth the key findings

on current occupational training offerings and expected growth

occupations of the future. The following recommendations emerge

from the findings of this study:

1. Initiate Procedures to Im lement Review Findings

Based on the findings in this study, the National Office of Job

Corps will ask center contractors, CCC's, and national contractors to

examine their vocational training offerings. Each center, CM and

national contractor will review the training programs offered in light

of the assessment of vocational offerings initiated in this review,

assessment of placement potential in each occupation according to local

labor market projections, and the capabilities of corpsmembers.

The occupational ranking scheme developed in this study provides two

"break points" for further examination of center programs (see Table 3).

First, the offerings appearing below the lower standard deviation line

of the occupational ranking are open to serious question. Centers with

these offerings will be required to delete the offerings unless they can

submit substantial justification and a preponderance of supporting

evidence for retaining the programs in any location. Those centers

where offerings will be deleted, will be asked to replace them with

more promising current Job Corps occupations (the top 19 on the

ranked list) or with new offerings from the list contained in this

study, once local and regional labor market demand has been ascertained

and illustrated in support of the choices. Centers that change

68

65

f training offerings will respond with proposals for the occupations

to be offered, except that the National Office will centrally procure

standardized curricula, equipment and initial training of loc61

instructors for selected new occupations where economies of scale

achieve cost savings.

Next, the occupations appearing in the lower ranking group of all the

occupations but above the standard deviation line and all other

occupations that have been flagged for excessive costs or negative

employment growth are the second candidates for examination. Centers

with these training offerings will also be requireo to submit justifica-

tion for the retention of'these programs and present alternative training

programs if performance and labor market opportunity support the need

for change.

The ratings on the Job Corps occupations in this review are based on

a national aggregated average of their performance according 1.1 a set

of specific criteria. A low rating for a particular occupation or

training provider on a national aggregated basis does not mean that

each center providing that training would receive a low 'ating. Certain

occupations may work well at a specific center or in a particular labor

market. Center by center response will be elicited to confirm the

performance of the occupation at each center prior to making a final

recommendation to delete a specific training program.

Tour, elimination of certain occupations would increase operating costs

at individual centers. For example, a center offering baking as an

occupation is supplied with bread products at minimal cost. Likewise,

a center offering VST experience as part of the training program has

69

some of its maintenance or construction needs met through the VST

projects. These are tangible benefits to the center; however,. the

center must demonstrate that it operates a viable training program in

terms of corpsmember joh placement in order for the occupation to be

retained as a training offering. Finally, exceptions to the elimination

of occupations in the lower group on the ranked list'would be made for

certain "step-off" occupations essential in the curricula of a higher

level occupation being offered.

2. Develop! and Implement a System for Biennial Training Program Review

Decisions on vocational training offerings should be made through

a system of national management guided by center participation. In

such a system, national Job Corps management would issue biennial

training program recommendations to training providers based on the

type of assessment of training offerings initiate' in this review. The

program recommendations would be based on a list of current Job Corps

training occupations which have been ranked according to performance on

specified variables, such as the list contained in this study or an

expanded list of variables. Improvements in MIS and cost data collection

should be made to further refine the variables used in ranking the relative

effectiveness of vocational offerings.

The National Office would require the centers to follow the procedures

outlined in recommendation number one. Such a manaciemen. approach

would assure ETA that the substantial majority of Job Corps enrollees

had the opportunity to be trained in occupations with the best overall

performance records; that new high growth occupations would be systematically

70

67a

introduced into the Job Corps system; that demonstrably poor performing

occupations are regularly identified,reviewed, and eliminated unless

special circumstances warranted their continuation, and that Job Corps

centers would retain the flexibility needed to tailor their training

programs to corpsmembers' needs.

3. pfTOST_Sktallotacts with Local Labor Market Sources

In recent years, Job Corps has encouraged corpsmember enrollment

at a center close to the corpsmember's home. Although not all corps-

members remain in the state or locality of the Job Corps center where

they receive their training, Job carps should ensure that centers contact

their State OccupationalInformation Coordinating Comnsiti:e and State

Employment Security Agency to obtain local/state occupational supply

and demand information when making decisions on vocational training]

Evidence that these contacts have been made should be a part of the

contracting process.

4. Conduct Follow-up Research Studies

Before conducting subsequent vocational reviews, efforts must be

made to insure the standardilation of any additional data that could be

used to expand the scope of this study. Data collection and reporting

processes must be reviewed and tested in advance of future review

projects to maximize the validity acid reliability of the information

reported. Further efforts must be directed into exploring the issues

uncovered by this initial study including the possibility that more

sophisticated statistical techniques (multivariate) may be applied to

the data tomaximizethe Knowledge gained from subsequent reviews.

71

JOG CORPSPERFORMANCE AND COST INDICATORS

A, PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

1064 PY 1004 TPESt EST

FT 1903 FY 1092 FY 1901 FY 1080 FY 1970 FY 1070 FY 1077

1. CoRPSMEMOER SERVICE YEAAS!CNSyi 40,644 39,480 MOBS 39,629 40,807 35,6641 27,044 22,092 20.696

2. New ENROLEES SERVED 60,818 45,612 68,466 53.501 76,437 76.059 69,861 40,500 41,289

3. 101A1.. PARTICIPANTS 192.998 11,007 91,802 07,562 114,341 194,120 04.902 70,495 12,227

4. TOM, TERMINATIONS 60,816 45,612 54,733 00.155 10,492 66,253 61,701 44,921 41,108

S. REPORTED PLACEMENT OUTCOMES 9 4 0 0 0 0 0 8

e. EMPLOYMENT 20.300 15,309 19,76 : 22,095 26,116 24,607 25,041 21,137 22,314

I. EDUCATION ENTRY 11,380 8,400 9.528 11.053 9,192 0.747 6,121 6,093 1.291

s. TOTAL.RO5ITIYE OUTCOMES le 4 01 31,608 23,709 29,290 34,030 36,888 31,214 31.962 27,920 29.105

4. 1141(16 OF !MIKES REPORTEDI 79 79 15 70 19 03 06 06 86

6. ESTIMATED PLACEMENT OUICO1IE11/4 0 a 0 ,e 9 9 I 8 8

4, EmPLOMEN1 26,480 19,845 23,995 21,521 34,036 33,380 38,464 26,611 23,932

O. EDUCATION Ewer 12,1128 9,016 11.093 12,591 11,738 1,557 6,991 0,146 7,745

4, TOTAL POSITIVE OU1CORES (4 , III 38,480 20,069 36,088 40,117 46,774 41,045 37,446 32,411 31,617

0. COS'S IN NOMINAL TERMS

AppROPRIArIONts IN 00-1 511,500 414,000 610,080 509,600 S89,708 411,701 295,099 417,080 214.109

2. 10rAr. COSTS is IN -980-1 626,700 463,200 661,790 671,208 530,000 410,080 319,100 279,704 281.189

A. U4440110,4 560,108 419.888 521,188 523,800 414,700 397,008 310,256 261,490 191.200

S. CAPITAL 55,690 62,109 46,600 41,400 55,101 72,010 61,400 21,300 16,489

3, OPERATIoN5 COST PER Cm51 13,014 13,504 13.000 13,262 11,056 11,114 11,317 10,982 9,220

4, OPERATIONS CIS! PER NEW ENROLLEE 9.210 9,092 8,510 9,776 6,425 6,614 6,302 6,143 4,631

S. COS! PER PARTICIPANT 6,491 6,317 5,633 6,369 4,239 3,020 3,749 3,508 3,012

6, OPERATIONS rat PER PLACEMENT 14,55E 14,222 15,217 13,159 10,652 9,660 8.512 7,790 9,949

(. cosrs ADA AO TO 1084 DOLLARS 904 1.960 1,041 1,895 1.172 1,207 1.400 1,821 1.149

I. APPROPRI41 ON II IN -000-1 556,710 414,900 641.044 646.600 062.190 616,540 416,200 838,809 411.280

2. TOTAL COSTA II III 9901 6e3, in 461,20e 5448,:56 624,400 632,108 604.660 633.700 422,100 370.704

a. OPERATIONS 639.036 410,696 645.602 621,660 650,100 612.698 442.400 381.000 117.668

W. CAPITAL 64,239 52.608 61,054 59,880 64.666 92.680 06.309 43.200 11 100

3, 0004110Ni COST PER Chrf '0,111 13.604 13,911 14.511 13,104 14,301 .6,610 16.220 15.272

4. OPERATIONS COS! PER NEW ENROLEE 0.026 9.602 9,023 le 206 1,4:4 7.225 2,614 7.863 7.605

S. COS! PER PARTICIPANT 5,203 5,167 5,323 5.9,0 4,060 4,011 6,2142 11,446 0,040

6, 01%11414044S COST PER PLACEMENT 14.932 14.227 14,051 14.469 12 404 12,101 11.069 11,04 9.996

A NOS! J09 CORPS ENROLLEES RECEIVE THEIR TRAINING 044 '0011 THEIR EOmmuNIIIES.IIWj OfOGRAPNICAk DISPERSION OF 7ERNINEEE 04416 11 DIFFICULT r041 SIAM 61444044ENtSLCU4227 AGENCIES ro LOCATE AND 01000! ON MANY OP TNEm. 1.( ESTImArioN PROCEDURE

IS eAsED 044 INE el000IED EMAIENCE or !ERMINE'S 0110 PLACED THEMSELVES, AND

REPRESENIS A CONSERVATIVE ASSumPrION,

721

69

PROFILE OF THE. "TYPICAL"JOB CORPS ENROLLEE C.

The "typical" or average Job Corps enrollee is an economically dis

advantaged youth, 18 years of age, male (63%), minority (71%), high

school dropout, reads at the 6th grade level, has ne,,er been employed

full time (75%), comes from either a family leceivinc public assist-

ance or one earning $5,369 per year, and was living in an

environment characterized by cultural deprivation, a disruptive home-

life, or other disorienting conditions impairing his (her) ability to

suecesslully participate in other programs providing needed training,

education or assistance.

Attachment

73

70

CHARACTERISTICS OF JOB CORPSENROLLEES ENTERING IN FY 1983

Age at Entry (Average: 18)

15-16 14.1%17 19.218 21.419 20.320 14.621 10.4

Sex

MaleFemale

62.6%37.4

Race-Ethnic Group

Black 56.0%White 28.5Hispanic 9.1Amer. Indian 3.6Asia-Pacific 2.8

Entry Reading Level (Average: Grade 6)

Under Grade 3 8.7%Grade 3-4 19.2Grade 5-6 22.2Grade 7-8 29.8Above Grade 8 20.2

.oedEiy111-7NeverEm3iiine: 75.0%

Families on Public Assistance: 38.3%

Estimated Family (Average: $5,389)(Exchidingfamilies receiving Public Assistance)

Under $3,000 36.1%

$3,000-$6,999 26.4$7,000-$8,999 15.3$9,000 & Over 22.2

Family Size (Average: 4)

1 person 25.4%2-4 35.1Es and over 39.5

74

71

Job Corps Performance and Costa_Cost Data (by Budget Category and Unit'Costal

Please provide cost data for Fiscal Years 1982, 1983and 1904 including New Obligational Authority, budgetcategory (including capital funds) and unit costs fOreach year.

The following information is provided:

COST SUMMARY

Transition Program YearFY 1982 FY 1983 1984 1984

Appropriation (NOA $ in 000) 589,600 618,000 414,900 577,500Taal Costs 570,200 566,700 463,200 625,700Operations Cost Per Corps7meMber Service Year 13,252 13,000 13,504 13,814

DETAILED BREAKOUT OF COST BY BUDGET CATEGORY($ in 000)

Transition Program YearCATEGORY FY 1982 FY 1983 1984 1984

CorpsmeMber Transportation 6,600 7,100 5,200 7,200CorpsmeMber Pay kAllowances 75,300 74,400 55,900 74,600Outreach, Placement, Support 22,900 22,300 18,800 24,600Center Operations 411,700 414,500 328,000 449,900National Mdmt. Systems 5,100 800 1,000 1,500National Admin. Expenses 2,2Cj 2,000 1,700 2,300TOTAL PROGRAM OPERATIONS 523,800 521,100 410,600 560,100

Construction and Rehab Costs* INA 16,600 23,700 31,800Capital Equipment INA 3,900 6,200 5,300Vehicles INA 2,400 2,400 3,300Voc, Skills Ttng. Materials INA 9,800 10,300 11,500Architect & Engineer Support INA 7,700 6,400 8,700Center Leases INA 5,200 3,600 5,000TOTAL CAPITAL 46,400 45,600 52,600 65,600

GRAND TOTAL 570,200 566,700 463,200 625,700

* Construction and Rehab Obligations 26 .700 35,700 23,300- Health 18,900 17,800 17,400- Other ConstiRehab - 2,000 600- Center Relocations 7,900 15,900 5,300

75

72

UNIT cmrs (cows PER CORPSMEMSER YEAS)FOR P' )GRAM OPERATICUS

Transition Program Year

CATEGORYFY 1982 FY 1983 1984 1984

Oorpemmiber Transportation 167 177. 172 178

Corpssember Pay 6 Allowances 1,905 1,856 1,838 1,839

Outreach, Placement, Support 579 556 618 607

Center Operations 10,416 10,341 10,787 11,096

Naticnalt4gmt. Systems 129 21 33 37

National Admin. Expenses 56 49 56 57

TJENI, OPERATIONS UNIT COST 13,252 13,000 13,504 13,814

73

73

Mr. O'KEEFE. One of the things that is built into the stuffy isthat it will be a continuing examination of the vocational offeringsin the Job Corps. This was not a one-time activity. I think the re-sults of it demonstrate to us the need to build it into the overalloperation on a continuing basis.

The CHAIRMAN. OK. To what extent are students hindered uponentering Job Corps by inadequate grounding in the basic coursessuch as reading, writing, and mathematics?

Mr. O'KEEFE. We put a profile into the record.Peter?Mr. RELL. Yes, Mr. Chairman. As the profile of a typical Job

Corps youth really shows, the average reading level of an enteringenrollee is the sixth grade level. Approximately 90 percent of theindividuals are high school dropouts. The Job Corps participantsare those who have not faired well in our regular school system.They have, for the most part, dropped out and have not gained thekind of academic skills that are necessary to compete in today'slabor market, which is why the Job Corps Program design calls fora combination of basic education and vocational skills training, be-cause the two go hand in hand.

I suspect that if our youngsters had their druthers, they wouldjust go to vocational training and not go to the classroom, but werequire them to do both because they do come in a deficient educa-_tional status.

The CHAIRMAN. S. 2111 made several specific suggestions regard-ing performance standards, such as the number of students whohave earned their general equivalency diplomas, et cetera. Whatstandards has the Labor Department considered for use in evaluat-ing Job Corps contractors and programs?

Mr. O'KEEFE. Mr. Chairman, to date we have developed fourstandards, and these standards were not developed within the Em-ployment and Training Administration alone. We had considerableinput from those involved in the operating of the program, includ-ing our two sister agencies, Agriculture and Interior.

We have at the present time, as I said, four standards that wewill be implementing this spring. Two of them deal with the reten-tion rates in the program. The third one deals with the placementrate of terminees who have ben retained in the program for atleast 180 days. The fourth one is a process indicator having to dealwith significant incidents that occur at the centers.

We are also in the process of reviewing additional performance.indicators which will permit us to assess the individual center.

We can submit for the record, sir, a summary of the performancestandards.

The CHAIRMAN. I would be happy to have that. We will makethat part of the record.

[Melt Tial supplied for the record follows;]

7

74

AF T

DIRECTIVE: Job Corps Bulletin No.

TO: ALL REGIONAL DIRECTORSUSDA and USD1 CONSERVATION AGENCYALL JOB CORPS CENTER DIRECTORS

FROM: PETER E. RELLDirectorOffice of Job Corps

SUBJECT: Establishment of Performance Standards forJob Corps Centers

1. Purpose. To establish policy, guidelines and requirements for

implementing performance standards for Job Corps center operators.

2. Reference. 20 CFR 684.23 and .134.

3. Background. Over the years, Job Corps has used various approaches

to monitor and assess performance of center operators. During recent

years, center reviews and the performance measurement system (PMS)

have served as the key processes through which management oversight

and assessment activities have been conducted. During Fiscal Year

1982, the Office of Job Corps initiated a joint effort with the Office

of Performance Management to develop formal performance standards

which would measure center operators' achievements as they relate to

overall objectives of the program, and which could be consistently

applied and formally incorporated into the review and procurement pro-

cesses. This Bulletin announces the establishment of standards for

center operators which will provide a formalized, objective framework

for assessing and improving the effectiveness of Job Corps centers on

an on-going basis.

75

The initial performance standards have been developed through an

extensive participatory effort involving each major segment of the Job"

Corps program, including national and regional office staff, center

directors, corporate and support contractor representatives, and the

Departments of Agriculture and Interior, The developmental process

was conducted chrough use of a Technical Work Group (TWG) whith pre-

pared initial recommendations and explcwed alternatives for

establishing measures, and an Advisory Committee which directed and

reviewed the work of the TWG and made final decisions on the selection

of measures and their application to center operators.

The process focused on identification and selection of measures, the

methodology for setting standards, and the application of standards to

center operators. Discussions regarding selection of initial stan-

dards involved identifying measures which (1) would reflect the objec-

tives of the program; (p) would be reflective of program outcomes

which were considered to be substantially within the control of the

center operator; and(3) were measurable (i.e., data was available or

readily obtainable). A statistical contractor was used to identify

those factors affecting performance which were beyond the center

operator's control to account for differences between centers and

establish expected levels of performance which would be unique to each

center based on characteristics of corpsmembers served, local economic

factors, and other center factors.

A listing of Technical Papers which describe the process in substan-

tial technical detail is included in Attachment 1. Copie, are

available from the Job Corps National Office upon reniest.

79

76

-3-

The resulting initial standards represent Phate I of an evolving pro-

Cass. The standards will be utilized to determine the relative

success of each center operator and establish a mechanism to direct

the program as a whole towards improved performance. Phases 11 and,

III will focus on the development of measures which will more comple-

tely reflect a center's impact on corpsmembers in terms of

"employability enhancement" (e.g., reading gains, vocational skills

attainment, etc.) Phase II, which will be on-going through Fiscal

Year 1984, will focus on developing interim employability enhancement

measures relating to vocational completions and reading gains. Phase

III is a longer term research effort that will focus on formulating

more sophisticated methods for measuring corpsmembers' educational

attainment, vocational skills acquisition, and social skills

development.

4. policy. Performance standards will constitute the formal process

for planning and assessing each center's overall level of effec-

tiveness in serving its corpsmembers. The standards provide the basis

for negotiating planned levels of performance with each center and for

monitoring actual progress of the center. For contract centers, the

standards will be incorporated into the procurement process and will

be treated as a contractual obligation. Performance assessments will

be an integral part of'the decision process in the exercise of option

years and in evaluating contractor's past performance as an input to

the competitive procurement process. For civilian conservation cen-'

ters, performance standards will be established and assessed on a

program year basis in.accordance with applicaticA procedures agreed to

80

77

-4-

IZY the Departments of Agriculture and Interior. For all centers,

assessments of performance against standards will be utilized to iden-

tify any areas requiring corrective action by the center operator,

5. Standards. Initial (Phase 1) performance standards include three

numerical measures and one process standard relating to how centers'

handle significant incidents. The standards established are

a. 90 Day Retention Rate

The number of terminees (including transferees received)

who were enrolled for 90 days or more divided by tote'

terminees (including transferees received).

b. '.80 Day Retention Rate

The number of terminees (including transferees recei.eJ)

who were enrolled for 180 days or more divided by total

terminees )plus transferees received).

c. Placement Rate of Terminees Staying 180 pis

The number of terminees who were enrolled for 180 days or

more and who were placed divided by the total number of

terminees who had been enrolled for 180 days or mire.

(Placement includes a corpsmember's entry into regular

employment, OJT, apprenticeship program, school or other

non-wage paying institutional training programs, or the

Armed Forces.)

40-4)61 O- 84 - -ft

78

-5-

d. Handling of Significant Incidents

The prevention, handling, and reporting of Type I signi-

oficant 4,ncidents at.each center shall be accOmplished.in

accordance with the procedures described in JCB 84-8 and

20 CFR 684,70, 71. 133'(j) and (k).

For each of the numerical measures, individualized standards will be

established for each center through the use of analytical models.

These statistical models are constructed to provide a basis for

setting planned levels of center performance taking into account those

factors which are beyond the control of the center operator. These

factors include differences in corpsmember demographics, center con-

figuration, and economic conditions. (A more detailed description of

this methodology is included in Attachment 2.)

Handling of significant incidents is a process standard which will be

assessed on a "pass/fail" basis in accordance with procedures and

requirements established in Job Corps Bulletin 84-8 and subsequent

amendments.

6. Process for Setting Center Standards. The analytical model for

each of the numerical standard:. is presented in Attachment 3. The

worksheets show the local factors taken into account for the par-

ticular standard, the nationll average experience value for each fac-

tor, and the relative weights for each. Instructions are provided on

how to calculate the expected performance for the center and establish

minimum, and maximum ranges while taking into account corpsmember

82

79

6-

Characteristics, center configuration, etc. The worksheets will be

completed using the last 12 months of actual experience data for the

twnter.

The initial calculation of the standards based on the most recent

year's experience implicitly assumes that corpsmember characteristics,

etc., for future periods will be consistent witn recent experience.

However, prior to making a determination as to whether a contract

center or civilian conservation center met its standards, the center's

standards will be recalculated using the most current data available '

to take into account any changes between planned and actual experienle

-Ore demographic, economic, or center factors. This will ensure that

aSSeSsmrnts of a center's performance are made on a fair and equitable

basis reflectin.2 the actual experience of the center in terms of the

type of input It actually received, actual economic conditions, etc.

The second factor influencing the level 0 each standard, is the.

weight Assigned to each variable in the statistical model. For

contract centers, tPe weights assigned to each variable will be in

place for the two year base period of the contract. Updated coef-

ficient: piovideti by the National Office will be used in the calcula-

tion or stank.,'ds for contract Option years and for each program yea)

for civilian conservation centers. The reference point--national

average experience valueswill also be updated annually to pick up

Oily Significant changes in overall program performance. Acceptable

ranges of performance will be revis:d annually to maintain ,a balance

of expected performance levels which wil result in approximately 25%

80

-7-

Of all center operators falling below minimum levels, 25% exceeding

maximum levels, and the remaining 50% falling in the diddle.

It should be noted that the statistical models for the trso retention

measures (90-day and 180-day) were developed utilizing enrollee-based

data, e.g., the number of enrollees who remained in the program for 90

days or more divided by the total number of enrollees who could ha've

stayed at least 90 days. These models were developed in arcordance

with guidance provided during the last Advisory Committee meeting,

based on their assessment that there could be potential time-lag

problems using terminee-based data (i.e., a center would not receive

credit for corpsmembers who stayed 90 or 180 days until after they

terminated).

After more careful reflection, however, it was determined that uti-

lizing enrollee-based'data had some drawbacks. It would be extremely

difficult for center operators to monitor their own performance since

they do not maintain nor have access to records on an "enrollee"

basis. Therefore, although the initial models were develoned using

enrollee-based data, performance assessmen;.s will be done using

termination-based data, and the definitions of the measures have been

revised accordingly. This will not create a problem relating to time-

lags in reporting since center operators will receive credit for

"carry-over" enrollees from one contract period to another. (It is

anticipated that a terminee-based model. will be available for initial

implementation, and future updates of the analytical models will be

84

81

developed utilizing terminee-based data.)

f. Application

a. Contract centers: Performance standards will be included in

all Requests for Proposals (RFPs) for center operations. Any proposal

submitted in response to a. RFP must show planned performance that is

at least equal tothe minimum of the exp'ected range for each standard.

Procurement review panels will look at the offeror's planned perfor-

mance in rating proposals, as well as evaluating ofteror's past

experience in relation to performance standards under the Past

Performance criterion. Determinations on exercise or non-exercise of

option years will be based on a current review of the center opera-

tor's performance against the standards coupled with an assessment of

the contractor's compliance with all other terms and conditions of the

contract as discussed in Section 8, Performance Assessments. RFP and

contract language will specify that standards will be calculated and

updated in accordance with the process described in this bulletin (see

Section 6).

b. Civilian conservation centers: Performance standards for

civilian conservation centers will be the same as those applied to

contract centers, but they will be applied and assessed on a program

year basis.

8, Performance Assessments

a. General: From a statistical standpoint, the critical deter-

mination is whether the center operators' actual performance on each

85

82

-9-

of the three numerical measures meets or exceeds the calculated range

of expected performance. If the center operator's performance on a

given measure falls below the minimum of the predicted range, th-

center has failed to meet that standard. If the center operator's

performance meets or exceeds the minimum value in the range, the standard

has been met. Should the center operator's performance meet or exceed

the maximum value in the predicted range, the center has achieved

superior performance on that standard.

A center operator's performance on each of the three numerical

measures will be combined to produce an overall rating of unaccep-

table, acceptable, or superior. This will be done through assigning a

numerical value to the actual performance level achieved for each

standard:

Performance Value

Center operator does not meet minimum 0

Center operator meets minimum but doesnot meet or exceed maximum

Center operator meets or exceeds maximum 2

The combined scores will be applied as follows:

- If the center operator falls below the minimum on

at least two of the three numerical standards (combined

score of 0-1), it is deemed to have failed to meet the standards

overall.

86

:r

-1

4

-10-

- If the center operator meets'oroexceeds the minimum on at

least two of the three standards (combined score of 244), it

is deemed to have met the standards overall. (Note: It is

possible to have a combined score of 2 and fail to meet stan-

dards overall if one standard has been exceeded and two have

not been met),

- If the center operator's performance meets or exceeds the

maximum on at least two of the three measures and at least

meets the minimum of the third (combined score of 5-6), it is

deemed to have achieved superior performance overall.

b. Judgmental Criterion: While the assessments will be .

utilized to determine whether a center operator's performance has been

unacceptable, acceptable, or superior, in relation to the standards,

Judgment must come into play in making final determinations. As

indicated in Section 8.:c. below, an opportunity will be provided to

center operators who fail to meet standards to submit evidence to the

Regional Director or Agency, as appropriate, to substantiate reasons for

one performance shortfall, This would include a variety of special

situations which are clearly beyond the control of the center operator,

including:

° a major fire or other severe damage to center facilities

8,

84

outbreak of serious health problems

center closings or relocations

significant processing delays in assignment of new enrollees

radical, unplanned change in enrollee composition of a center(e.g., influx of refugees)

In such cases, evidence submitted by the center operator, an analysis

of performance trends, and findings from the most recent center review

will be utilized to make a final determination on acceptability or

nonacceptability of the center operator's performance in relation to

the standards.

c. Contract centers: Job Corps now awards contracts for center_

operations for a base two-year period, with three one-year options

which may be exercised by the Government. It has, therefore, been

determined that the contract year is the most practical and

appropriate period to be used in asSessing a center's performance

against its standards. Assessments will occur as follows:

(1) End of first year: At the end of the first year of the

base contract period, the Regional Director will review the cen-

ter's performance using the most current data available. A find-

ings letter will be sent to the contractor by the end of the 13th

month (approximately) indicating the results of the assessment.

Contractors not meeting the minimum level of performance will be

informed of the shortfall and directed to take corrective action. Center

operators will be responsible for monitoring their own performance on

88

85

-12-

an on-going basis and submitting vritten evidence of any

extenuating circumstances contributing to the performance

shortfall within 30 days of the findings letter.

(2) End of first 16 months: The Regional Director will con-

duct a follow-up assessment of the center operator's performance

against recalculated standards (see Section 6) at the end of the

16th month (approximately) of the base two-year period. if the contrac-

tor has submitted no written explanation for any existing perfor-

mance shortfalls by the time of thisoassessment, it will be

assum':d there were no mitigating circumstances contributing to the

shortfall during the period under review. The results of this

assessment will be considered in the decision process for awarding

optiun years along with other information on compliance with

contractual provisions (including the work statement) available

from the most recent center review, monitoring, audit reports,

investigations, etc.

(a) If the contractor has failed to meet the standards

overall, the Regional Director will review any evidence submitted

by the contractor and make a decision as to whether or not the

shortfall is due to extenuating circumstances. If a determination

is made that extenuating cicumstances did negatively affect the

Contractor's performance, the option year decision will be made

taking this into account, considering performance trends, and

following 4 assessment of the contractor's overall performance'

89

86

-13-

relative to all terms and conditions of the contract. If the

Regional Director determines the shortfall is unacceptable (i.e.,

was not caused by factors beyond the contractor's control), the

contractor will be informed by the end of the 17th month

(approximately) that an option year vill not be exercised and the

RFP process will be initiated.

(b) if the contractor has met the standards overall, the

Regional Director will consider the contractor's performance

againststandards,,proposed option year price, and performance

relative to other terms and conditions of the contract to make a

decision on whether or not to exercise the option year and notify

the contractor of this decision.

(c) If the contractor's perforeance'against standards has

been superior overall, proposed option year costs are determined

to be reasonable, and all other terms and conditions of the

contract have been met, the Regional Director will notify the

contractor that the option year will be exercised.

(3) Additional option year assessments: At approximately four

months into each option year, the Regional Director will assess the

center operator's performance against recalculated standards

(following the procedures outlined in (2) above) to determine whether

an additional option year will be exercised. A findings letter will

be issued within 30 days of the assessment. Again, the contractor is

90.

87

-14-

responsible for monitoringOts own performance and submitting evidence

Of extenuating circumstances if performance shortfalls exist or are

anticipated. Contractor input must be submitted before the end of the

fourth month of each option year so that the Regional Director can

consider it on a timely basis.

d. Conservation Centers: In accordance with the new JTPA

planning cycle, the agencies will develop program operating plans for

their centers on a program year basis beginning in 1985. It has,

therefore, been determined that the program year is the most practical

and appropriate period to be used in assessing civilian conservation

centers performance against standards. Assessments of performance

against recalculated standards for each conservation center will be

cmpleted by 'the end of the first quarter of the following program

year. Results of these assessments, development of corrective action

plans and followup assessments will be handled in accordance with

interagency procedures.

e. Sample Results: FY 1982 center performance levels against each

of the numerical standards are included in Attachment 4 to illustrate

how application of the statistical model will work. It should be noted

that this illustration uses fiscal year data (not contract period data)

and does not show the minimum and maximum range calculations. The mini-

mum and maximum performance ranges for each center can be calculated

using the model worksheets shown in Attachment 3.

91

88

-15-

on Fiscal Year 1983 data.

10. Responsibilities

a. National Office. The National Office shall be responsible for

establishing overall policy regarding performance standards; for pro-

viding updated coefficients for calculation of standards; and for pro-

viding annual national average experience values.

b. Regional Offices. Job Corps Regional Offices shall be respon-

sible for negotiating performance standards with each center operator,

monitoring performance against standards, evaluating evidence sub-

mitted by contractors who are experiencing performance shortfalls, and

consideiling performance assessments in procurement and contract admi-

nistration activities.

c. Agencies. The Departments of Agriculture and Interior shall

be responsible for,implementing performance standards with their

respective centers, monitoring performance, and recommending correc-

tive actions as required.

d. Centers. Center operators shall be responsible for monitoring

their own progress against standards on an on-going basis and for pro-

viding timely documentation on any performance shortfalls caused by

circumstances outside their immediate control.

11. Action Required. Regional Directors, Agencies and center opera-

tors shall comply with the requirements and procedures established in

this Bulletin in accordance with the implementation schedule

established in Section 9.

92

89

-16-

12. Inquiries. Inquiries should be directed to Jan Gulledge,

8 -376 -2646. Agencies direct inquiries to DA/FS Millard Mitchell,

382-1649 or DI/OYP Ben Murdock, 343-8086.

Attachment 1 - List of Technical PapersAttachment 2 - Description of MethodologyAttachment 3 - Worksheets and InstructionsAttachment 4 - Illustration of the Application of Performance

Standards Using FY 82/83 DataAttachment 5 - RFP Language

93

so

ATTACHMENT 41

LIST OF TECHNICAL PAPERS FOR JOB CORPS PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

Date Title and related items

May 1982 "Approach and Options for Establishing Job CorpsPerformance Standards"; TWG report (47pp)

June 1982 "Technical Paper No. 1: Recruitment/Screening"TWG paper (4pp)

June 1982 "Technical Paper No, 2: Performance Measures andAccounting for Differences for Job Corps Centers.and Placement Contractors"; TWG paper (16pp)

June 1982 "Technical Paper No. 3: Principles for Applicationof Job Corps Performance Standards"; TWG paper (16pp)

Juno 1982 "Technical Paper No. 4: Interim Findings andRecommendations on Selected Short and Long TermTasks Related to Residential Living, CommunityRelations, Education, and Vocational TrainingComponents of Job Corps"; TWG paper (20pp)

July 1982 "Progress Report: Development of Job CorpsPerformance Standards"; ETA staff paper (20pp)

May 1983 "Technical Paper No. 5: Selection of PerformanceMeasures for Establishing Job Corps CenterStandards"; TWG paper (13pp)

May 1983 "Technical Paper No. 6: Methodology forEstablishing Job Corps Performance Standards";TWG paper (19pp)

August 1983 "Technical Paper No, 7: Perfbrmance Standardsfor Job Corps Centers"; ETA staff paper (67pp)

94

91

.1111.111.11.1.1MINIMI

ATTACHMENT 12

DESCRIPTION OF METHODOLOGY USED IN SETTINGPERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR JOB CORPS CENTERS

Introduction

The purpose of this paper is to describe the basicstatistical approach that has been selected to establishperformance standards for Job Corps centers. This paperoffers a general summary of why this methodology wasselected and how it is being used in setting individualizedstandards for each center on the three numerical performancemeasures defined in the accompanying Job Corps Bulletin.More detailed treatment of related subject areas can befound'in the technical papers referenced in Attachment #1.

Background

Agreement was reached early in the project that a numberof factors beyond the control of center operators doinfluence performance and, therefore, ought to be takeninto account in formulating performance standards for thecenters...The relationship of such factors to centerperformance could be explored through a statistical techniquetermed regression analysis. This technique provides the b,isfor specifying the degree of relationship between these fac.1..rs.and the performance measure. Accordingly, project work focusedon constructing a statistical model based on regression analysisthat would incorporate several key aspects:

o Utilization of data elements and sourcesavailable in the Job Corps informationsystems and other official sources;

o Inclusion of only those local factorsthat are outside management controland which are statistically determinedto have a bearing on performance: and

o Development of a methodology to adjustfor differences between centers on thelocal factors selected.

These main aspects were carefully considered by the TechnicalWork Group and by the Advisory Committee in their deliberationsand recommendations. Based on WA: policy guidance, localfactors were identified, analyzed, and tested which might beincluded in the model together with developing aisethodologyfor adjusting center differences.

95

92

2

Use of Available DataHases

The existing Job Corps information system was found tocontain an excellent array of data elements for use instandards setting. Specifically, the Job Corps Mainstreamand Placement reporting processes provide complete demographicand outcome data on all corpsmembers entering or terminatingduring FY 1982 and into FY 1983. Thus, this Job Corps databasein,combination with other data sources furnishes highly usefuldata elements in three main categories of information:

o Enrollee characteristic's and terminationoutcomes,

o Center characteristics, and

o Home State socio-economic characteristics.

Corpamember characteristics data include age, sex, race,education, reading scores, family status, etc. Centercharacteristics data include type of center (contract vs.CCC), authorized capacity, and configuration (male/female,resident/commuter). Special supplementary data on currentcondition of center facilities was obtained through a recentsurvey conducted by the Office of Job Corps. Socio-economiccharacteristics include the following items on the enrollee'shome state: population, unemployment rate, average annualpayroll per employee, percentages of labor force participationand for manufacturing and service industries, etc.

Criteria for. Local Factors

An essential step in building the performance model is toselect the specific data elements to be used in developingthe adjustment methodology. The basic criteria for determiningwhether a local factor should be included were as follows:

o The local factor is readily quantifiableand based on available data sources.

o The local factor has a statisticallysignificant relationdhip to performanceoutcomes for corpsmembers.

ho The local factor should pass d common-sensetest (i.e. be intuitively correct) regardingits antickpated relationship to performancemeasures,

a The local factor actually makes a differencein predicting performance.

o The local fa,tor needs to be includedto satisfy eqpropriate policy reasons.

96

93

3 -

Using the methodology described below, an extensiveexamination was conducted using the available data sources.The aim of this statistical analysis was to determine theextent of relationship (coefficients) that corpsmembercharacteristics and other data elements have on corpsmembersuccess in the program. Corpsmember success against eachperformance measure can then be the basis for predictingand assessing the performance of each center.

Selection of Methodolo -- Center or Individual Level

At the outset of the project, the initial expectation was thatthe approach selected would compare performance based onprogram-level statistics (i.e. center level), which is beingused in most other ETA programs for performance standardspurposes. However, the availability of a rich database onindividual Job Corps enrollees permitted consideration andadoption of another approach by the Advisory Committee.The approach is termed "analysis by covariance" and isbased on individual corpsmember characteristics and outcomes.There are a variety of reasons why the analysis by covarianceapproach was selected as the preferred statistical approachfor the center performance model:

o Tne information directly available from theJob Corps database expands some 100 canterobservations to tens of thousands ofindividual corpsmember observations.

o No information is lost when the individualdata is aggregated to the center level orto the national level.

o Corpsmember based observations are invariaolymore plausible for Job Corps center operatorsand managers.

o Thy ifficients for local factors are morere ) and less likely to be biased whenbaseu n corpsmember data and are expectedto remain more stable over periods of time.

o The full influence of particular variablescan be examined since it is possible to modelthe relationship between known actual individualperformance and Individual explanatory factors.

o Many more loeal factors can be included in themodel and, as a consequence, this helps to assurethat the coefficients are more likely to be valid.

Another important advantage of this methodology is that it canexamine the interrelationships of multiple variables in the

du Obl 0- 84 - -7

BEST COPY AVAILABLE

97

94

- 4

model. In other words, taking separate looks at race andreading score and welfare status may involve some duplicationof influence indicated in each of these. What analysis bycovariance does is to estimate this interrelationship amongthe variables in the model and take it into considerationin determining the coefficients. By estimating the influenceof different combinations of variables on performance, thismethodology enables the effect of that difference to be usedin predicting the performance of the center for a particularmeasure.

Analyzing and Testing the Methodology.

The analysis by covariance approach uses all of the informationavailable about individual corpsmembers and aggregates suchcharacteristics and performance data up to the level of thecenters with which they are affiliated. This methodologymodels and develops expectations against each performancemeasure (e.g. 90 day enrollee retention rate, 180 day enrolleeretention rate, an placement rate for enrollees staying 180days).

Using this methodology, the performance model can be constructedso that it can adjust ccnter performance expectations for eachmeasure based on the selected local factors covering enrolleeCharacteristics, center characteristics, and home state socio-economic characteristics This means that individualizedstandards can be established for each center for each measure.

As a result of extensive analysis and testing, it was possibleto determine those factors having the most significant influenceon predicting the several performance measures. More importantly,such analysis and testing provided the basis for resolvingquestions as to which local factors would be included and othersdropped. Many variables were explored in the process of framingthe performance model. These were tested to ascertain whetherthe difference in performance associated with a particularvariable depended on the presence or absence of another variable.

During this testing, the model was trimmed according to thecriteria for selecting local factors outline4. larlier in thispaper. Reasons for excluding a variable or comparison dependedor the strength of the given variable or comparison. In thecase of the enrollee retention rates where data pertaineddirectly to individuals, differences larger than about twopercent were considered to be statistically significant andthe variable was included. For the placement rate, differencesas small as about three percent were retained in the model.

Final Model,s,

The worksheets for each performance measure (see Attachment 0)represent the final models developed through the use of thestatistical methodology described in this paper. As will be

BEST COPY AVAILABLE

98

95

- 5 -

noted, these worksheets contain lotlal factors reflectinga sizeable proportion of data slements based on basiccorpsmember characteristics. Likewise, the worksheetscontinue co include most of the previously identifiedhome state socio-economic data. The center characteristicsfactors have been augmented by several variables based onthe recent survey of current center facility conditions.

The comparative number orlocal factors by cluster thatappear on the worksheets for the three numerical measuresis summarized below.

Local Factor ENROLLEE RETENTION PLACEMENTCluster 90 Day 180 Day RhTE

CORPSMEMBERCHARACTERISTICS 23 23 13

i

HOME STATESOCIO-ECONOMIC

DATA 5 5 6

CENTERCHARACTERISTICS 8 8 3

Totals 36 16 22

In addition to a copy of the model workshbet for each performancemeasure, Attachment #3 to the accompanying Job Corps Bulletinalso contains instructions for completing items on the worksheets.

BEST copy iyvt;1 r

39

,111,1111.111MM11111111

96

Attachment #3A

INFORMATION AND INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING

JOB CORPS CENTER PERFORMANCE STANDARDS WORKSHEETS

Genekal There are five separate sections in Attachment #3.The first part is this section ($3A) which provides basicinformation and instructions regarding the other four parts.As will be noted, the second section (#3B) is an example ofa worksheet,fined out for the STAY180 rate using one center'sdata for FY 1982. The next three parts are facsimile copiesof the worksheets for each of the three numerical performancestandards:

*3C 90 Day Retention Rate,#3D 180 Day Retention Rate, and113E Placement Rate for 180 Day Stayers.

The following information and instructions ate furnished forpurposes of assisting in completing the worksheets. This partalso includes '..he sources of data and computation methods foritems on the worksheets. No information is shown for certainitems that are considered self-explanatory as they appear.

Item A NAME OF JOB CORPS CENTER

Be sure this is shown on each worksheet,/'

Item B NAME OF CONTRACfOR/AGENCY

Enter center operator's name unless the worksheet is beingprepared for an RFP in which case this item should be leftblank.

Item C CONTRACT NIZIBER

Item D CONTRACT PERIOD

Enter the current period of she contract for the contractorcited in Item B" above or the anticipated contract period ifthe worksheet is being completed for an REP.

Item E TYPE OF CALCULATION/DATE

In,"icate whether the calculation is being done for an RFP orfor a performance review of an existing center operator. If

the calculation is for a performance review, be sure to showthe time period under review. The date of the calculationshould be shown in the space indicated.

Item F PF.RFOPMANCI: MEASURE

This name is preprinted for convenience in completing the sheets.

100BEST COPY

97

Attachment M3A - Page 2

Item G LOCAL FACTOR SWIMARY

The detailed data for this item is extracted from the reverseside of the form once all columns have been calculated. Thelocal factors which constitute the performance model for theparticular measure have been preprinted. These local factorsshown to influence center performance levels are grouped intothree clusters as shown. The Sub-totals for each clustershould be entered in the blank indicated along with the totalat the bottom.

Column (a) Actual for P.:evious Period

Enter the actual values tor each factor during the most recent oneyear period for the cente..

Column (b) Current Period Planned Values

The values shown for factors are expected to reflect actual e,Terier....cof the center during the previous period except when policy directimprovided by the Office of Job Corps indicates there should be a change.If the worksheet is being completed for an RFP, enter the plannedvalues'as anticipated. When the worksheet is for a performance review,the recalculation is to be based on the actual values for each localfactor during the performance period under review.

Column (c) National Average Factor "alues

This data has been preprinted for convenience in completing the worksheets.

Column (d) Difference (b) (c)

Enter the result of subtracting Column (c) data for each local factorfran Column (b), data fen- the same lacal factor.

Column (e) Weights

This data hai been preprinted for convenience in completing the worksheets.

Co,umn (f) Effects of Local Factors

Enter the net result of multiplying Column (d) data for each individuallocal factor times Column (e) for the same factor and post in Column (f).Compute the sub-total for each cluster in the space indicated. Enteroverall total at bottom of the page. The sub-totals and overall totalshown be entered as instructed under Item G on the front side of the form.

Item H NATIONAL. AVERAGE PERFORMANCE Untrl

This data has been preprinted for convenience in completingthe worksheets.

101

98

Attachment *3A - Page 3

Item I PREDICTED CENTER- PERFORMANCE LEVEE.

This figure is calculated by taking the + or - factor found.n the "TOTAL" space under Item G and adding it to the"NATICNALAVERACZ PERFORMANCE WOW found in It H above.

Item J PREDICIM PERFORMANCE RANGE ADJUSTMENT

This figure has been preprinted for convenience in completingthe worksheets for each measure. The process for settingacceptable performance ranges is explained in the Job CorpsBulletin.

Item K INITIAL PLANNED PERFORMANCE

Compute the minimum and maximum levels using the data fromItems I and J and enter in the places indicated.

Item L RECALCULATED PERFORMANCE STANDARD

If the worksheet is being completed for a performance review,enter the recalculated minimum and maximum as computed fromchanges between planned and actual experience on corpsme,lbercharacteristics, center configuration, or home State economicconditions.

Additional Information on Local Variables and De..a Sources

The following information has been included in order toindicate the reference groups used for the various localfactors. The reference groups specified below are not shownon the worksheet. Other explanations are added to facilitatethe understanding and use of these worksheets.

AGE % Age 15-16 is the referenfA! group for the retention rates and% Age 17 or above is the reference group for the placement rate.

SEX % Male (or not indicated) is the reference group on this factorfor all three measures.

RACE % Black (or don't know) is the reference group on this factorfor the two retention rates. On the Placement Rate, thereference group on this factor is % White (or don't know).

BILINMAL The reference group here is the % No Need (or don't know) 3SINSTRUCTION used for the retention rates.

NEEDED

YEARS OF For the retention rates, the reference group on this factorSCHOOLING is % 0-B yrs. schooling pre-JC (or don't know). For the

placement rate, the reference group is % Less than 12 yrsschooling.

BEST COPY

102

1.1.11M.i.4.1.idadlidil

99

Attachment 03A - Page 4

FAMILY On the two retention measures, the reference group for thisSIZE factor is % Family Size 1 -' 3.

FAMILY % Other (or don't know) is the reference group on thisHEAD factor for the two retention rates. This variable is framed

somewhat differently on the Placement Rate with the factorshown on the form being % CorpsmeMbers Dependent and thereference group being % Corpsmembers Head of Household/Independent,

DEPENDENTS For the two retention measures, the reference group onthis variable is % No Dependents (or don't know).

READING % RJS Reading scores 0-6 (or don't knave) is the referenceSCORE group on this variable fur the two retention rates. The

reference group on this factor for the Placement Rate is% RJS Reading Scores less than 12 (or don't know).

WELFARE For all three measures, the reference:group on thisSTATUS variable is % No AFDC or State Aid Received (or don't know).

CENTER The worksheets for each of the three measures shows % CCC CenterTYPE and the reference group is % Contract Center. Another factor

relating to center type is % All Male Center and the referencegroup is % Co-ed Center.

CENTER The reference group for this factor on the two retentionLOCATION rates is t Rural or Inner-City Lccation.

PHYSICAL For the retention rates, twu factors shown are % CampusSETTING Setting and % Self-Contained Center (i.e. all buildings

and activities at one center site and not at otherlocations). The reference groups are the converse ofthese being %.Not Campus Style Setting and % NotSelf-Contained center.

HOMETOWN On the Placement Rate, the reference group for thisvariable is q From Place Less Than 10,000.

CENTER For. al? three me, lures, the reference group on thisRESIDENTS variable is % Corpsnembers Living off Center (i.e. centneters)

Sources of Corpsmember Home State Socio- Economic Data

Factor Definition and Time Period Source

AVERAGE ANNUAL PAY State average annual pay of workers Employment and Wages1981 ($1,000s) covered by State and Federal (ES-202) Program,

Unemployment Insurance Programs Division of(CY 1981) Occupational err]

Administrative StatisticBureau of LaborStatistics

BEST COPY 103

Sources of

Factor

100,

Home State Data, cont'd

Definition and Time Period

State 12-month average(October 1981 - September 1982)

% POPULATION INTHE LABOR FORCE1982

Attachment 113A - Page 5

%,UNEMPLOYMENT 1982 State 12-month average forpersons in the labor force(October 1981-September 1382)

t EMPLOYED IN SERVICE State annual average (CY 1982)OR MANUFACTURING 1982

POPULATION 1982

(1.000,0008)

PUBLIC EDUCATIONEXPENDITURES PERADA PUPIL 1981($1,000s)

Preliminary estimates ofState,populations, July 1, 1982

State average per pupilexpenditures based on averagedaily attendance (ADA)forschool year ending June 1981

104

Source

Division of Local AreaUnemployment Statistics,Office of Employmentand UnemploymentStatistics, Bureau ofLabor Statistics

Same as above

Manufacturing, Servicesand Total Non-agriculturalEmployment CY 1982,Current EmploymentStatistics (BLS-790Series), Division ofMonthly IndustryEmployment Statistics,

Office of Employment andUnemployment Statistics,

Jureau of Labor Statistics

Po2ulation

Bureau If the Census,11?!ulation Estimates

Projections,Series P-25, No. 927,issued February 1983.

Bureau of the CensusStatistical Abstractof the U.S. (1982-83),p. 155, 103rd editionand U.S. National

Center for EducationalStatistics, Digest ofEducation Statistics

BEST COPY

101

PERFORMANCE STANDARDSFOR

JO$ CORPS CENTERSMODEL WORKSHEET

A. NAME OF JOB CORPS CENTER

(FY an Lot Anse ies .(014)

I, NAME OF CONTIIACTDR'ACENCY

E x a Alp leC. CONTRACT WAIVER O. CONTRACT PERIOD

Food To .

i---Dm of CaHowtoo Wa, Day, Yr.'L TYPE OP CALCULATION /"X" Oft/

UPFY 8 2.ittOMINWM AM.. lot Tem hood .... ..-

P. PERFORMANCE MEASURE

10( Day Retention Pate ("STRY130")

G. LOCAL FACTOR SUMMARY 110. ovum Ws lot 1n,111 LCOMBINED weiamys

JI

CORSMEMSER CHARACTERISTICS oboe -IcHal Id Items 1 . 23 )

CENTER CONFIGURATION Mal.10101 tot IWO 24 31

HOME STATE SOCIOICONOMIC ASPECTS Ovbous t« Hord 32 36

4.7C:I VEI

TOTAL i 3. 06

H. NATIONAL AVERAGE PIRFOHMANCE LEVEL IPmolnied lot montoolorao' 53.53

I. PREDICTED CENTER PERFORMANCE LEVEL 66,59

J. PREDICTED PERFORMANCE RANGE ADJUSTMENT Nmolho 7112. - 4 5

Postilyo+3.9

L INITIAL PLANNED PERFORMANCE LEVEL Mionoto Sp.. 92.°Mmagom a 76 , 49

I.- RECALCULATED PERFORMANCE STANDARD

1/04

mm... 710.

MmOooto 310.

BEST COPY AV,7.,

105

ETA 1001 10o. 10131

102

RIF *MAKI "' . AR .5 FON JOS COWS CINTFRS - elownd 17 TS4 SI A : o m,IVIFISs.

. 02 5

Snots ofLocat Fmors ..

+ III -

-.22

LOCAL FACTORS"WNW Osth woMtvI.4l0

A.141 for144,0out new!

C.'..'% ht out Nsonoi Av....Filmed Tofu,: 1,..w. %/wn'

Ibl le)

11:10M1.11MMI1111.311.111

iiiiIs)

torpersmbat Clummeristico1. II Age 17 at en 11.7 20.2. 0 a 1 at en MUM/

INRCRUNIIffnEMIllMRS-MilNEHIMINUIN

.0

0 3 2,: nIMINEN

MEM.3 . % e at en4, % e 20 at an 13.2 M.111111/11!"1311M

'

MMMINIEMMMin= wirowntmutr

.....o

5. i21 at en,

7, ciiiireac .

8. 0 Marken Indian9. cAs an-Pac 9.0 IRA I 4. 8

0. % Needs bilirqualirstruction 7. I . 19 7 .72

1. % 9 a school' .7 - .30

2. % 0 5 INIELINIIIIIIMMI!IMINIIIIITTIN - . 2.4

I 3, % a . rill4. % a .. rnlig 1.8.7

SC? 67.1

41.4 :08.4, lW

.118-.004

-.012

.7,

.03-.63

15. % y a ze o4 or more

,6. t Paceival Mc orState Aid

17. % RA score 7-11 IC0 19.4 .056 -.2418. t FM score 12-15 16.1

111Lia.M11111WSKUNIMININCIFAMINICTIMI - 41 9. % WS score 16-7v0. 5 *1 $ 'COCO - AMIN

St. 014.4

IIMININIE11111111MIIMINOVIIIII37.3 26 5

4,4.

-.01-. 0 2 8

FEC-.26

- . le, 1. t-ria-lna a2. % One or sore

dependents.3. C.-family heal II. 3 7.2 5.1 -.920 -.10

**Zubl'otalC.. 2.

Centa Confirmation24. % Center residents 52.0 91 . 5 - r, -.176 .,25. - -conTirrn c o 5 . 0 -"ZS 1 si

26. * Campus sty a set L, 0 - 72 0 - 2 :427. % Location not rural

or inner-city -0 4 9 . 4 -VIM -. 010

28. % (SC center 1 0 0 4

29. TarnZeicenterIIHNINIIIIIIMI.

4 MillEniMIIIIMEMUNIIIIMMIMIRA= .

on these items)

.

- .1- I.

30. :. . J. ra31. a t I Is

(0 Each center scores either 0 or 100 **SubTota

Homo Spew SocioeconomicAmmo

32. % Employed in sereor =tit- 1982 422 40.5 2. -.2787 8 -.64

33. / 1611111111111111111111.11.43

l4,4-. 8 5 8

.181

.I(34. verege anwe pay

1981 ( 3. 000s)35. 33ra on :

( 1000000e)

/6.7

29.7EMI

8.16 Z,9

36. Toublic educationexpenditures pa' ALAP13.11 1981 (61 000s)

2.59 2.27 y 2, 2.2 0 1

**Sub Tots1,98

NOTTS! Lost hp eeluims I, pH 41 imPffil Pe. ...Mew___T.il...&1,..,, I, , th Mt.,. and ...hal lorel to ..11,, AM, TOTAL II. 0 6

BEST copyis. U.'

1,06

103


JOB CORPS CENTERSMODEL WORKSHEET

iE. NAME OF CCH.TRACTOR/AGENCY, A. NAME OF JO .O PS CENTER

C. CONTRACT NUMBER D. CONTRACT ERIODPreen To

I. TYPE OF CALCULATION 1"X' Om/

RFP

PHlottMoto Ran. lot Tom Pond ...

Om of CNcoNlan Ole, C.. Y1.1

F. PERFORMANCE MEASURE

90 pay Retention Rate (osTAy90.)

t

O. LORAL FACTOR SUIPmARY Ike worm Oda tot In All

CORPSMENIIER CHARACTERISTICS

CENTER CONPIGURATION

HOME STATE SOCIOECONOMIC ASPECTS

COMBINED MIGHT'

tiotrioul 1NAN

ISLRIA AA Immo

ISIApiotN IM Homo

1

24

32

23

31 )

35 I

TOTAL

M. RATIONAL AVIRACIT PERFORMANCE MIL Pm/timed FM olmmmEmoN 6' .611

I, PREDICTED CENTER t IRFORMANCII LEVEL

J. PREDICTED PERFORMANCE RANOI ADJUSTMENT NeltIm 21w3.9

IWO. ow. 4.5

N. INITIAL PLANNER PERFORMANCE LEVEL SOMPRom IN.

Minn... ai.,.

L. RECALCULATED PERFORMANCE STANDARD

1/84

Momoloro aft,

MIIM11.101 )1....

(TA 1(01 1001 HMI

BEST COPY

107

104

PERFORMANCE IIANDAII04 FOR Jon COMPS CINtillf - Continual

Cuomo PnlodPlanned yew

1/B4Ne.onen.L rtaa,,,'riot Volute.

lel

fill -

,,TAY9 0

Pfigh,i.Fara ol

Local FatallOCAl FACTORS

INvinOW WA tonwo..11

Am.! Ie.Preara Proad

NI Il MI + Ill n

Corpenember Characteristic'1. I e 17 at entry 20.5 -.0012. I e at entry 20,1 .0043. I e at entry 4 18.2 .0164. % Age 0 at entry 1 3. 2 .0285. I Age 21 at entry 9.9

29.49.0

-_..1.1___3.1

0 0 1- 1 1R-__01s,-.082

6. I VitSte7. li---ac8. I American Indian4. It As aiMr.ta tc ic ,

.11410. I Needs bilingual

instruction1.4 .160

11. 1-15-yiii schooling 257 .02 012. I 10 yrs schoolirg 23.6 41136

13. I 11 yrs schooling 16.1 .04914. ITF yrs ling 18.7 08415. I Family size of

4 or more67.11 -.0 1 3

16. I Received M1 orState hid 38.4 -: . 01 5

17. 18.15 score 7-11 19.42 I . 0

.083.1,1338. I RJS score 12-15

19. % PIS score 16-20 27.518.337.3

.143

.17.3-.011.0. I RJS ',00ze 21-25

.1. IIiiIna e.2. I One or rrore

d ents 8 . 0 -.02823.11 rangy head 7.2 -ale

Sub .Total.

Centel Configuration24, I Center residents 91.5 - . 17 5

25. I Self-contained ctr 9 75.073.F

. 041-

.02026. I Campus style settisp

27. I Location not rurgl-or inner-city r 4 9 .4 -.020

28. I OCC center 9 26.7 .05429. li All male center 9 11.6 -.0 2 630. Ava feciltjy,ratirg 6.05 1.01431. Capacity (1,000s) .69 2.211

( 9 Each center scores either 0 or 100 on these items) "*Sutt-Totale.

Horne State SocioeconomicAmnon

32. I Enployed in servicor tronufactng 1982

40.5

.--

- . 32 5

33. I Uneriployed 1982 8.86 .1'834. -Average annual pay

1981 ($1,000s)15.27 - . 993

35. Population 1982(1,000,0000 >

8.1 .213

36. Public educationexpenditures per AnApupil 1981 ($110009)

,

2.27 2. 31 5

"Sub Total.,

NOT!!' Vol. ltu cola.. ace le) ',frigateeffete' Mel haggle lot efeh Wetanuihd anal,"

lo, .11.41001//lye TOTAL 7//'Ma la Caere

Pop t

108

105


JOS CORPS CENTERS

......,

MODEL WORKSHEET

A. MAW OF JOP CORPS CENTER

.

B. NAME OP CONTRACTOR/AGENCY

C. CONTISCTNLAISS 0. CONTRACT PER100Rom. To.

I. Tv.. 0 CALCULATION ("X" 0,00 my0 PFIFP An..* IM Tung Pet Po .... .....

Dote o1 Cateuteieee fA/o. ON. Vt.

P. PERFORIAANCI 41A1k1111

180 Day Retention Rate ( "STAY180")

...............

IL LOCAL FACTOR SUMMARY am wen* MN Tot COMIIINtO INSIONTS

COPPING MOIR CHARACT/ ROWS Ittoliloisi foe Illonf 1 23 I

CINT114 CONFIGURATION ISub.totol AN Roma 24 33 I

NOW sure SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASTICTS aublotot la URN. 32 36 I

TOTAL Name

N. NATIONAL AVERAGE PERFORMANCE LIVIL ffhWONol IN aureonMemoI5J.53

I. PRIOICTIO CI IER PERFORMANCE LIVIL

J. PREDICTED ITERPORMANCI RANGE AORMTMINTNORM jar 4.5PoolGoo )Ios.

+3.9

IL INITIAL PLANNIO PIRPORAIANCI LIVIL MIAlmorn .0...

kkooftwon 11...

I. RICALCULATIO PIMORAANCI STANDARD

1/84

144own 2.

PALORIIMI b..

60

tt 160I 1046 MN

106

IRANPAROS FOR .101 CORPS VENTERS - CentInuod IPA STAY1 8 0.__WIFORMANC,

LOCAL FACTORSIthrober WO motvarlr.ry/

..6.1 I.Pr vino Fowl

Ctor.nI PeriodPWAntrd Vinut:

Nolion0 Am lwFactor vaunt

odi..,// lel

+ WI -V"Igh!'.

tel

.025

Illsco DILeal Fe. on

+ III -III Ibl I.I

20.'I CorpenenterCharacteena1. At a 17 it entry2. 8 e 10 it entry 20.3 .0423. 8 e at 'entry 18.2 .0671. i Ag 20 at entry 19.2 . 0 795' e at entry 9.9 .0586. t to7. 8 Hispanic

29.4 -.138.2....Q__.

3 63..1

-.0348. 8 Pinar ican Indian - 1.119

Ill9. 8 Asian-Pr-ific10. 8 heeds bilingual

instruction11. 8 y re s-§---C1T

3.4 .19723.3 072

_-1318__.-__, Q47

12. 8 113 yrs school fly 23.613. 8 11 yra school 16.114. 12 wa school nhg 18.7 .118

-.0 0415. 8 Faintly size of4 or more 67.1

16. 8 Received AFDC orState Aid 39.4 -.012

17. 8 MS snore 7-11 9 - 4-2 1. 0

.056

.n8218.1 FUS score 12-1519. 8Tifgetore IS:20-

4_127-518.3

.108

.13420. 3 R3S score 21-2521. 877--s T-na e 3 7.3

8.0- 012-.02822. 8 One or morecrtients

23. 81Nihuad 7.2 -.020

Conte CodaTam7i24. 8 Center residents 91.5

''SubIeuls.

-.17625. 8 Self-contained ctr s 75.0 .0 1926. 8 Cain style setting@ 75.9 .0 7927. Trocation not rural

or Inner-city 8 4 9 . 4 -.010.0 5 528. 1 center 26.72 6 . 7

29. 8 XII male cen @ 1 1. 6 .01230. Avg [ pcility rating 6 Q5 .98231. Capacity (1,00053 .f. ,

items)

40.5

-....--1,605

"Sub-Utah.

-.278

( 8 Each center scores. either 0 or--------- -------Homo Sul, SoebetonomicAspecti

32. 4 Employed in sarvicor ranufewtng 1982

100 on these-------_----

33. Wriettployed 1982 8.86 . Trr-34. Average annual pay

1981 ($1,000s)1 5. 2 7 -.858

35. Population 1982(1,000,000s)

36. Public educatio"tscpenditures per Min,..opil 1981 (61,000s)

8.36" .181

2.27 2.201

"'Sub Tcall............. ........NOM. 'CAW Per ..honn. 10 wd III ewtAlt4 I., ...olio,. TOTAL VD..

rem P

0

107


JOE CORPS CENTERSMODEL WORKSHEET

A. NAME OF .:C.2 CORPS CENTER E. NAME OP CONTRACTOR/AGENCY

C. CONTRACT NUMBER 0. CONTRACT PERIODOwn. To.

I TYPE OP CALCULATION (X' On

0 RFP0 PedorAmmi Rev.tre I e I Tim, PmatI .......

AMMOMe.

Dm. of CIKuNtion (Me. ON. W.

A PIRFORMANCE MEASURE

Pfacement Rate for 180 Gay Stayers

0. LOCAL FACTOR SUMMARY IS wale IO llama COMOINIO

CORPS/AIME/A CHARACTERISTICS ISub.tomi IP; 110,14 1 13 I

CENTER CONPRIURATION lEu22.2omi Im none 14 16 I

HOME STATE SOCIO4CONOMIC ASPECTS dobootsi for UNTO 17 22 I

TOTAL 21.

N. NATIONAL AVERAGE PERFORMANCE IVIL lhoPolmmf em " "....4..4 ...... .

...--............

73.78

I. PRIOICTED CENTER PERFORMANCE LEVEL

A tntoleite PERFORMANCE PIANOS ADJUSTMENT Nowt., ,Rpo.5.2

'WON 31/1.+7.6

K. INITIAL PLANNED PERFORMANCE LEVEL MNl..o. 20..

Minimum 30..

L. RECALCULATED PIRFORIAANCE ETANOARO

1/84

Minirnem sm...

MAOrmom Do..

1t IRIS (Dm ISIS,

ill

108

. 1A . s FOR

/8LOCAL PACTONS

Member OseA etlAmeteeeeee)

0 y CPS 0Ailed is.

P,VV.,111 Pinned

lei

, - PM .,...

twin* heoclPlowed Volvo.

Ill

ketone, *vulg.elector Valol"........y1Z,2..................

lel

I tgrtanntCalm

+ All -yo.voi. 11101, 0

Lge/ e aweIII _..i. III -

Corpstnombte giaraettrittics

I. % Age 15-16 at entry 15.9 .019

2. % Female 34.4 -.0543. 1 Black 54.8 - . 1 «6

4. Hispanic . 9.5 -.0225. 9 American Indian 2.6 -.1036. 9 Asian/Pacific 3. 1 .0417. 1 12 yra or more

of schooling 21. 0 .04 3

B. I Corpanatters thatare dependants 68.5 -.026

9. 9 Received AFDC 22.6--.

-..03710. 9 !US score 12-25 7 1. 1 .06011. 9 Fran place

10,000-49,999 17.8 .030

12. 9 Fran place .

50,000-249,999 20.6 .021

13. 1 Fran place250,000 or over 37.2 .093

Wier Configwation

14. 9 Center residents

-- .

90.8

**Sut.Touls.,

-.263

15.1 All male centersr 13.5 .039_.,

16. t OX Canters 9 29.8 .032

( @ Each renter scoroe, either 0 or 100

on these items)

Homo State SocioeconomicAvail

17. Population 1982(1,000 000a) 8.94

''Sub-Tout.

-.0 4 5

18. 9 Toil:Aim in ther force 1982 47.2 -1.026

19. 9 0nernplairesnt 1982 9-2_7__4

1 5 . 3 3

-_1....11119..

.44220. Average aaual pay1981 ($1 000e)

21. 9 Elyploy inmanufacturiny 1992 20 .1 7 - . 593

22. Public educationexpenditures per mcvpupil 1981 ($1,0008)

2.10 11.088

..,-...... --TerdiNiaNous .Nis fr eolemw, le eA lol pvaqatol lea taaraftlanft

'Wall £1.1lafoll tar lath talaaars and mania .alal Harr ititi..........._. TOTAL 11/1"

/WI

112

BEST COPY

Affs.A.AAWA. AL

109

Attachment 04

90 DAY RETENTION RATES - Center Rankings by Residuals, FY82

Center Name limberActualRate

PredictedRate Residual

1 JULIET 167 19.1018. 6").331/ -13.762

2 " GOLCONDA 359 59.8886 /0.3726 -10.109

3 HR1-.AT ONYX 179 !;9.)1/9 69044:1/ -14).197

4 WOOPSTOLK 729 62.1399 71.6/68 -9.66,

5 KNOXVIILE A97 61.4060 70.9792 -9.619

6 COLIBRAN 308 59.4156 644.63e6 -9.,111

7 RA1IHERG :,47 :-4/.891.1 67.09E, -9,[1c

B SUSOUEHANNA,

Sc.' 62.2776 /2,24109

9 1:1.1-01-AANI) H96 62.4881 /1.64)2: -8,91i

10 IROQUOIS 20.' 67.8718 /!./'/,, -6./04

' 1 1 pRI-1,1f 11101RG .'04 61.70')9 7:,,9 ( 41 --,-;.1t,-

12 KITTRELL 525 63.01/6 700-4/.,9 -7.9,,2

13 HCHI-NCK 311 61.091., 69.1-{'!..6 -I.,214 ROSWEL1 364 62.36:'6 69./839 -6.66"

15 1-41ACKW-LL '!1:16 66.0839 /3,6)495 -,.7:,

16 LAREI'O 246 67.1951 69.3,-44P -6. '.,' 0

17 HAWAII '215 1/, 109 s 81.00(,, -..1

.18 CASSADAUA 352 64.2015 b., :''L -5.36019 HRONSW1CK '06 AN ..11 Ai ..-V)8.2 -.4.,':!.

70 GRAFTON 653 54.8239 5,.1/2.5 -1.6.',

21 OF1AWARF VAI I EY 466 69.57/9 /.4.3,,Y5 -1.'..ti7

-.,__ DAYTON .":48 63.:06:. 6:./.1 1,7 7

23 1AC1 H0N011.LE 740P 6.51-111 70.:)421 -1.)424

24 EXCELSIOR SF'RINUS 789 59.41.'3 63.6,'66 -1.0 5

25 1411-)404.AKE 713 67.',701 -/.!.02)L3 -,),c,,.

26 PINE KNOT 350 67.1129 71.2990 -3.k. ::

27 Iro-ASURF I ALE 377 67.619 1 71.1648

28 GARY 3055 67.7250 /1.2110 -3.6,:8

29 sACRAM1-'NTO 477 q0.71)4 H (. /9S7 - '.. ,:,6

30 POTOMAC , 605 68.5950 -,Y,,.89,6 -3.06-)

31 FIAIWOODS 307 64.19,,1 67.9771

32 INLAND EMPIRE 309 77.99r. P.0.66o,H -2 '0533 HARF'FK> FERRY 771 66.1207 /..),5150 --.-'0E

34 BATESVIl 1 F 396 64.6165 6e.1-41:'3 -7,!,-.1

35 nNFONTA 588 6%.9.461 68,-091 - ,10:.

36 L E' JOHNSON 307 71.0o98 73;5115 -2,7,-4E.

37 SlFkKA NFVAI'A R45 66..!7,,,' 68.9007 - ,12i,

.38 WESTOVER 906 66.0014 67.P762 -1 ,9!,6

39 6RAN0 RAPIDS 723 61.82',7 6,3'37 -11'47e..

40 LOS ANGELES '731 81.3351 h3.11 -1.6.tS

41 OCONALOFTEE 249 66.666/ 68, '914 -1,1!..6

42 GULFPORT 341 67.r454 4)44.',-,!..59 -1,.

43 VFN1SON 410 6A.1116 66.671,8 -1.171

44 TUSNEOEF 304 66.1184 644,9/69 -1.06±

45 A11ERHORY 736 69.1291 70.9558 -09446 TURNER 1401 69.0,':,1 70.198: -0.965

47 OlITHRIE 94-) 68.080 69.9096 -6,s0.'.,

48 WHITNEY YOLINO 458 66.C177 6,.626 -0.6 1

49 HI LONIS H47 71.9008 7Y.1.':,7 70.;71

40-0111 0-n4---0

BEST COPY ry t,

113

110

90 Day Retention Rates, Cont'dCenter Rankings by Residuals, FY82

Center Name

Attachment #4 - Page 2

Actual PredictedNumber Rate Rate Residual

50 OID DOMINION 475 67.789;, 6/.5)1551 CINCINNATI 288 20.1861 71.084352 WOODLAND . 369 63.9566 61...011 0.04953 AI DoNUEROLIE 600 /0,16/0 70.0'-'4554 KICKING HORSE 333 76.8/69 '6.1179 0.5'155 AlIANTA 687 69.57?v 69.1'43 6,11.7656 OUACHITA 273 67.3Y91 66.9eA057 PIITSBURGH 160 6,.41.1-a 61.1665 0.66115S CHARLESTON 473 65.3:177 61.14i6359 KFYSTONE 755, 67.1667 66.1199 1.074260 FORT SIMCOE 303 67.9868 66.13E11 1.773061 M1NGO 321 70.1010 614,9128 1.172:62 mCKINNEy 864 614.8',7 67.0/9563 PRFSTONSRURG 117 51.8896 0,1656 1.844564 TRAPPER CREEK 253 79.9119 //.009865 TONGUE FOINT 629 75,0152 77.9855 7..176E'66 SAN DIEGO 615 77.9862 ,78.0Y06 2.71;t67 JArnSS rREEK '81 67.615/ 65.6,780 7.417768 60XELDER 273 73.4917 70.96:0 2.6Ha69 PINE RIDGE 348 6'.0690 *1.310970 CLEARFIELD 1668 74.9100 77.3191 2.97R:171 skilF RIDGE 171 61.0^^% 59.7852 3. 196172 E CLEMENTS 2946 76.40H7 7:.7.,,18 3.559573 DFTRAIT 411 7A.1-1-,-.7 71.959774 GLENMONT 511 73.1896 69.917075 PHOI-NIX 460 81,1013 76.892476 H HIJHFHRFY 408 67,8972 6A.300 5.037777 NFW JERSEY 417 71.7076 61.6171 ,76 RED ROCK 418 63.3971 58.919879 TORELDIAH 349 60.7110 57.5164BO GAINESVILLE 420 75.4762 69.0.73 6.847381 ANGFLL 766 71.060-, 67.1159 6.41,2782 LITTI E ROCK 270 65.9154 58.3993 8.003E83 CASS 251 75.6977 70.7182 6.614184 WOLF CREEK 294 73.1293 66.9116 8.116!!85 ,FFNANSCOT 645 70.8117 67.6074 8.^69886 COUNRIA FiASIN 278 73.7410 65.0934 8.7'1187 wFPFR DACIN 229 78.1659 69.1790 9.105988 TUCSON 297 81,5118 75.9/85 10,0543Sc SAN JOSE 514 79.9611 71.8199 10.735790 CURLEW 223 74,88/9 63.7.'07 11,!Th91 ANACONDA 199 61.61',4 71.7871 11.492 CRYSTAL SPRINGS 343 77.R176 66.1169 11,(SYY:93 SHREPORI 404 76.7176 70.7971 11.113094 NORTH1ANDS 398 72.8643 61,0305 11.759095 SAWN BRONX 234 79,4877 61,-1057, y.7,048540

96 TIMBE LAKE 241 82.9876 67.16(10 16.531097 MARsiA0 239 79.1979 61,1917 i8.114098 EL FASO 440 94.7727 71,9113 19.7703

BEST (;()1')(

r7

114

°

.

111


180 DAY RETENTION RATES - -enter

Center Name Nmbar

Rankings by Residuals, FY82

Actual PredictedRate Rate Residual

1 JOIIET 16' 3n,1757 50.1292 -I6.3672 GOLCONDA 360 47.2727 7,s.6n99 -11./!73 ,S0q0UPHANNA 562 11,0605 'Y'..0721 -11.105,4 KITTRELL 525 43.b095 51,7179 -10,9EE5 FRrurHyou. 20t 18,1517 ".7-01 -1,..*+.31

.

.6 GREA1 ONYX 179 46,76B-7 57,1w:.p -1.,3177 COLIARAN 308 ".1.1558 ".1,1,;";4 -16.,,;.:

8 JACKSONVILLE 308 41.8831 n:',2o76 -7.e919 C1FVFIAND 896 16.2051 5-..1190 -,-..91s.

10 HAWAII 21' 62.7907 69.1710 -F,1'.511 WOODSTGCK 729 16.7761 55,770812 SCHENCK 311 47,7:184 ..-,e,-.,7

13 RAMBERG 247 11,7217 7.0,46:,2 -7,0.:.t.'

14 EXCELSIOR SPRINGS '790 40.6129 47.77:E ..r.

15 CHFSAPI-AKE 773 17.71A1 51.6.902 00,..c-,

16 .BIACKWELL 786 53,8462 61,4638 -6.7':-7

17 KNOXYULE 696 18.7669 !.4eso94 -E.15-18 TUSKEGEE 304 46.7105 57.6570 -t...?c19 SACRAMvUTO 476 63.217.3 6.1.A.75!: ---n::20 FINE KNOT 350 52,2857 58.6130 -511:21 PRESTONgAIIRG 317 12.1'21 17,1577 --..30t:

22 LAREDO 216 47,9675 53.11I23 ROWEL_ 7E4 1..7031 52.5'.12 -4..cre!'

24 IROQUOIS 204 53.3912 58.2755 -.!,5,.1

2..!. TREASHRF IAA!: 777 51.',199 '.6,9,.;226 PITTSLUFGH 461 43.1670 1E.,1,.! -A.,,127 SIEKKA Ni-A,AD!) 647 .19.168/ 'VI. 1 47"28 FLATWOODS 307 48.8'.99 76,476329 KART 3055 9.9816 -.I.4.,E%

30 DENISON 410 44.6780 50,1:40 _.-114.7,,:.

31 DEIAWAKE V011EY 464 '.4,0948 -.A.1113 -1.7.;:-

32 ALBUQUERQUE 600 49.5000 !......9Y71., '.

33 GRAFTON 65.2 19,S77! 1,17:9 " 11234 WHITNEY YOUNG 458 48.2511 51.t0y73` nkeion RAPIDS 723 16.71cf 19.693 -1.c736 ATTEPBURY 736 55.0272 '5 7.097S -J. ',;.1

37 ONvONTA .596 19.6c .1.5 -1.68036 TONGUE POINT 629 5,96I6 57,7.'10 -1,5:.7.

39 H HUMPHREY 408 1''.,0980 17.197--40 DAYTON 248 50.8065 :.',767.8 -1.5!-.41 CASSADAGA 15: A,1105 18.:411E42 GUTHRIE 941 51.0096 57.1560 -1.'6:43 TNI AND 1--MIRE 309 65.69:-.P1 6A.A191 -1.1:.

44 WESTOVEF: 906 51.7660 57.9173 -t.ol,)45 HARPERS FERRY- 271 !,A.1',76 A0,1970 -2.94146 OUACHITA 773 53,4799 54.2500 -0.':i4

47 NIFMM011 !-J11 .1.6-.91 52.-443 ..-0.'::

48 SAN DIEGO con 60.6!-.01 6.4,0.45 -0.1-7.:.

49 RATFSVFILE 396 /1,515: -0,1141s - 0 . l"-' i'

BEST COPY

115

112

180 DAY RETENTION RATES, Cont'dCenter Rankings by Residuals. FY82


Actual PredictedCenter Name Number Rate Ratc Residual

50 CINCINNATI 289 51.6713 77j.11172 -0.07251 ATI ANTA A87 57,8181 52.6'.94 0.32652 JACOBS CREEK 281 54.0975 .4.3014 0.10353 OCONAI.OFTEE 249 ,-1.0201 51.'1999 O.A4L54 TAHLEQUAH 348 36.4913 :58.'575 0.65655 DFTROIT 410 5A.5851 5i.1:-.11 0.A7256 MINGO 322 57.4815 51.1150 1.03c5? BRUNSWICK 508 18.6720 18.1190 1.1647

, 5F MCKINNEY 864 51.7361 50.0171 A.3303'.59 GOLFPORT 341 51.079) '0.9966 1.17,69

60 POTOMAC 604 57.4:,03 5/.2671 1.561461 FONT S1MPOE 303 5'..11,5 ,v3..,090 1.AM62 KEYSTONE 750 52.9313 0.t486963 KIKKINI. HoRSE. 133 :.9.497, :1A.982264 LOS ANGELES 732 69.3,0:9 6/.67.3163 5T'11)1115 844 .9.1751 -5.96.7466 WOODLAND 369 50.1355 19.031t7 OAINFSVIILE 420 ,-..lmi .A.475568 cLEARririv 1.'_39 57.6997 55.0085 2.6/Y069 E ClEOKKITS 2947 58.1105 y.279970 PHOENIX 460 62.3913 59.1.1 1.1/r.9-,1

1 8 AOHN,30K1 307 A0.2A0A ,6.H1r5 3.165772 TURNER 1401 57.500 51.5541j3 TKAPPK CBEEK 25.: A1.19.1' 'ol.0,4;74 OLD DOMINION 475 54,1053 19.716175 NI OF. KIDGE :72 17.7911 li. .181

76 CHARLESTON 472' 52.7542 4/.80'077 Nt-W 11R,-,EY 117 A0.1914 .1.194578 RED ROCK 418 46.6',0i 11,;,',It; 5.60.379 80XEKoER 273 :,7.117:,v. '0...401 4"!

.80 TUCSON 297 67.0014 60.464/ 7.0."4el P1NF KTDOE 340- :,1.7211 19.143382 LITTLE ROCK 270 4E.8889 41.1;2183 WOIF CRFEK 294 60./011 1.1.0.565

84 F'ENOF :SCOT 645 54.1:46.7 16..6'6685 NoRIHIANDS 399 t,0,37,9 41,16-'t V'.86 SAN JOSE 514 62,6159 59.6.'.'8

87 ANI,ELL :67 61,1'11 ..O.A.82 10. *Alf88 COLUMBIA BASIN 278 58.6331 4H.,0:.6 10.96/209 1010-R HASIN 229 62.4101 .1. ,1 .9 11,044290 SOUTH YkUNX 231 58.5170 18.:319 11.1966.91 COBIEw 223 61.6771 ',1.1,47.8 .13'592 CRYSTAL SPRINDS 343 62.9/38 5o.360A 12,/16393 ANACONDA 299 A6.8496 '0.6,459 1).499C94 CASS 251 68.5.'59 '..,H.r,1.0

95 SKIKtVKPOR1 404 60.6146 ,,i,14.8

96 fIMNKB LAKE 241 72.19,0 51.0016 18.9:Y897 MAIO,ANG '.139 67,3640 1!..181 20,,Ha2,78 EL PASO 441 ,81,6327 :4(.8198 23.1.'14

BEST COPY

116

113

Attachment 14 - Page 5

PLACEMENT RATE FOR 180 DAY STAYERS

Centex Name Number

- Center Rankings by Residuals

Actual PredictedRate Rate . Residual

1 FRFNLHEURG 39 33,33A. 61.863", -27,22.i2 GRAND RANDS .156 37.1795 62.8781 -77.A:.23 ATLANTA 141 20.0071 61.739*I -25.51564 KITTRELL 97 34,0:06 58.9653 -25.'705 AITERRURY 111 12.34:3 61.20.... -7,.3P:'

6 ANACONDA 52 71.1538 91.5:.11 -20.,7.7 JACAES CREEK 5b 17.2227 . 65.7670 -1:4.14.28 CRYSTAL SPRINGS 38 36.8421 55.39O5 '-1R.2579 6AINESV1LLE SO ',0,0000 66.260' -1."'8I

10 CLEVELAND 111 54.0541 71.361 -16.1 311 ONEONTA 100 73.0000 87.601 ' -15,"5912 HAWAII 47 80.8511 92.9776 -11.Y:613 TRAPPER rREEK 28 7"0,000(: 90.96 -31+y6 :-14 PRESTONSPORG 43 60.46201 66.7.7.8 -11.791lb H HUI1PHREY 68 63,7357 75.61JA -13.:10L16 ROSWELL 47 *,,-,.3404 .81.2841 -1.2,:.6

17 PRUNgQICK 73 17,,20!:.5 56.03'. -1'.:.9.-

18 BLACKWELL 56 65.5172 -:5.1951 -10.90;19 SLHENCK 6o 'I1.'052 6:.4,s3,.. -10.*:c20 'JACKSONVILLE 46 71.7.47,1 80,8:'25, -9.0-'3

21 OCONALUF4SE 81 .6.7901 65.8687 -9.(.."5

...: FICTLE,Aoh 0. 7 ; , 5- :. .- 6 /?.711. -,..12:23 SoUlH PRoNi 43 HA.7.'09 91.8985 -6.11124 GLENMONT 110 85.42.15 91.7173 -:).Y d

.'.2; 'WOLK 256 ',1.56'!, 57./69! -...15'.'

26 IROQUOIS 26 8Q.7692 Fit...4116 -5.11127 JUIIET 9 .,5.575:o... 719.8401 -4.:::28 CASS 34 70.5:1? 71.3:8/ -3.71C29 'CIRAF1ON 51 70.58e.' 71.2768 -1..,i530 LOS ANGELES 165 88,4848 91,3616 -3.16131 BAMmERG 24 :,0,0600 50.4235 -.:..c,-/

32 PINE KNOT 79 62.0:'53 6:..!:,067 -2.31933 :-,HREVEPORT 51 74.J0914 75.6. 916 -:.16234 DAYTON 62 62.9932 61.,4110 -2.01135 DEL AWAKE VALLEY 9t) 8:.-).222 85.1643 -1.67536 ALDUOUEROUE 69 86.9:.65 E7,9820 -1.21.737 GUIJJINDA 1.2 69,2308 70.1;23c -0.i7,53

38 BOXELDER 52 H6.5385 56.9881 -0.;,11

39 SIERRA No.VADA 149 75.1678 76.?121 -0.62640 WESTUVER 150 76.6667 76.:NE+1 -0.16741 COLLPRAN 36 91.666,7 92.0993 -0,43142 CLEARFIELD 250 82.4000 87.1228 -0.11443 E CLEMENTS 764 ',4.081: 54.8076 -0.0!44 WHITNEY YOUNG 94 58.O106 O8.1410 0.10145 CHARLF51T0N 68 /7.9117' 77.3279 0.6146 KEYSTOQL 144 71.5278 69.8504 0.86447 CAS5ADA6A 54 )9.6'96 19.9136 1.3 248 SACRAMENTO 159 68.6/92 11/.111.i0 1,44349 FINE RIDGE 60 88.3333 85.9858 1.769

BEST COPY (,

1.1.7

WINEIN6M1WWWIII

114

Attachment 114

Placement Rates for 180 Day Stayers, Cont'dCenter Rankings.by Reiduals, FY 82

Actual PredictedCenter Name Number Rate Rate

- Page 6

Residual

50 GREAT ONYX 42 64.2857 62.5010 1.78751 POTOMAC 91 85.7113 83.1625 .2.06552 TUSKEGEE 59 54.23/3 1,1.0/31 .1YE53 WENFR BASIN 3 87',/113 85.0610 2,sie54 TAHLEQUAH 34 76.4706 73.512? 2,97E57 KN0xVILLE '105 61.5744 3.0Y756 TONGUE POINT 148 85.8108 8A.2461 3.055

57 INLAND EMPIRE 68 8S.'7151 84.711458 MARSING 83 89,1566 85.7793 3.159654 WOODLAND 7.6.62i1 75.046E 2,214(60 GARY 33c 74.7071 71,0989 3,116561 PHOENIX 138 96,1768 97.4444 3.587?62 EL P6 S0 96 89,5H13 85.538163 KICKING HORSE 32 81.2500 76.71..)9 3.511764 TIMPFR IAKE 77 8!..7111 4.096E,65 FORT SIMCOF 99 90.9091 85,9:.?11 4.666206 ST LOUIS 111 80.1807 71.1026 5.5135671 SAN DIEGO 197 84.3750 78i5P18 7.51i:62 WOIF CREEK 67 88,0597 .5.631369 PENOBSCOT 201 85,5,/71 80.1157 5.659,70 TUCSON 77 94,80:;" 87,8832 6,5617'71 PE8I9OH 70 7(19 79.1.750 t 'p9°72 CURIEW 66 99.1939 81.8607 7.703073 FLATWOODS 53 E1.9(,7 77,571974 HARPERS FERRY 57 89,1777 132,87t175 CINCINNATI 61 78.6885 70.8107 2.877S'6 RFD RncE e9 85,3931 77.118377 OLD DOMINION 81 65.7706 E1,2.'1178 SAN JOSE 177 98.8701 90.1634 8.44

ANGELL 83 87.9518 79.716.1 9.0115en MINGO 53 81.0189 71.9736 c.C17:SI L P JOHNSON 18 66.6667 532'4 9.117782 FLOE RIDGE 43 81,,1957 71,6687 9,aq:1783 MCKINNEY 119 79.e119 69,0E11 9.4N1684 COIUMPIA BASIN 81 90.1?75 80.6755 9.417785 CHESAPEAKE 119 78.9916 69.0071 9.7,1186 SINEPORT 46 71.7191 61,195587 WOOPSTOCK 118 e6.4,107, 7A.9K-.9 9.0q4PG TREASURE LAKE 63 91.65017' 81.64.09 11.9P,7?EY GUTHRIE 109 81.4862 70.0!"..16

90 EXCELSDIR SPRINGS 94 91,6170 14.P:91 LAREDO 30 76.6047 80.578897 N1.W JERSEY 87 90,5882 74.1171 1!,.03PQ93 PATESYILLE 4E 6,',000 51.151694 NOETHIANDS 64 8-917-. A9.1774 1E.!3?:0

SUSQUEHANNA 94 R8.7979 71,9857 17 .0

9c DF1FOIT 113 71.5.519 17.7,71:97 OUACHITA 22 95.4.15 19.207298 LITTLE ROCK 80,0000 51.394:i

BEST COPY '''' /T

118

115

ATTACHMENT 5

REVISIONS TO MODEL CENTER RFP

*Page I-241 c. Past Performance of the Offeror

The offeror will submit five (5) copies of the following infor-mation regarding contract performance:

Provide a list of contracts (including contract numbers) andprograms which are currently operated or have been operatedin the past three years by the offeror,' and detail the offeror'scollective experience as it relates to. the work required bythis RFP. Identify the organizations for whom the work was per-formed and the inclusive dates. Indicate performance statisticsas they relate to past and current contracts. For past or cur-rent Job Corps center operators, include a summary of perfor-mance for the past three years which compares actual performanceto the goals and/or performance standards specified in eachcontract. For both Job Corps and non-Job Corps contractors,provide information on financial performance against budgetsand/or the total contract price and the results of any auditsfor the past three years.

Page 1-31, Information Abouu Offeror's Past Performance

When evaluating an offeror's past performance, review panelmembers will take into consideration information obtained fromgovernmental units (such as the Office of the Inspector GeneralETA components, other Job Corps regional offices, and otheragencies). The contracting officer reserves the right to con-tact non-governmental sources to get information regarding theflezar!n_past performance and to have this information evalu-ated by the review panel.

Offerors who have not had a grant or contract with the Departmentof Labor within three years before the proposed date of award ofthis contract are subject to a pre-award audit or pre-award surveyby the Office of the Inspector General at the request of theContracting Officer. For offerors who now have a grant or con-tract with the Department'or have had one within the last three

years, a performance assessment will be made from a review ofdocuments in the official file. At a minimum, such assessmentsshall measure performance against contract goals or performancestandards, compliance with reporting requriements and financialrequirements specified in the contract or grant. Offerors who ,

have, or within the past three years have had, contracts tooperate Job Corps centers will also be evaluated for compliancewith serious incident reporting as set forth in 684.70, 684.71,

684.133(j) and 684.133(k). Such evaluation will include anassessment of timeliness and accuracy of report submissions,responsiveness of management in handling such incidents, andeffectiveness of correct actions in resolving identified admini-

trative or programmatic weaknesses.

119

116

- 2 -

Page 22 Clause /.1.c., Performance Goals and Reports

The contractor shZ.11 make every effort to achieve the performancestandards for the center as calculated in accordance with TobCorps Bulletin 84- . Periodic assessments of actual performanceas compared to standards will be conducted, and the results willbe an integral part of the procurement process in judging pastperformance and in the decision process for exercise of optionyears under thAs contract.

The contractor shall make its bet effort to achieve performancelevels within the ranges calculated in accordance with Job CorpsBulletin 84- for the following numerical performance standards:

(1) 90-day retention rate

(2) 180-day retention rate

(3) Placement rate (of terminees who were enrolled for over180 days)

In addition, the contractor shall be assessed for compliance withthe following placess standard:

The prevention, handling and reporting of Type I signifi-cant incidents at each center shall be accomplished inaccordance with the procedures described in Job CorpsBulletin 84-8 and 20 CFR 684.70, 71, 133(j) and (k).

The contractor shall establish internal goals in accordance with20 CFR 684.23 and provide an internal monitoring system to insurecompliance with the contract in accordance, with 20 CFR 684.134.The contractor shall maintain data on the center's performancein relation to its standards. Data shall be maintained by con-tract year.

Periodic communications will be held between the Regional Officeand the center to evaluate such data and to determine ways toimprove performance. It is the contractor's responsibility tonotify the regional office of potential problems in meetingthe standards and, if appropriate, provide written documenta-tion as to why minimum standards have not been achieved duringthe contract assessment period.

Page 51, Clause IX c., Exercise of Option

The contracting officer will analyze the option yeax' cost inrelation to the current market price in deciding whether toexercise the option. Factors to be considered by the Con-tracting Officer in the awarding of the option include thecontractor's performance compared to performance standardsenumerated in Clause 1.1.c. and in accordance with Job Corps

120

117

- 3 -

Bulletin 84- , compliance with all other terms and conditionsof the contract, fair market value of similar service contracts,the necessity of reducing disruptions to operations, and theadvantage to the Government.

Failure to achieve minimum performance levels for the numericalstandards set for in Clause /.1.c. and calculated in accordancewith Job Corps Bulletin 84- will result in an initial unfavor-able determination in the Contracting Officer's considerationfor exercise of an option year. Meeting or exceeding the maxi-mum levels calculated in accordance with Job Corps Bulletin84- will result in an initial favorable option year determina-tion.

While the achievement of performance standards will be a majorfactor in the Contracting Officer's decision regarding. theexercise of option years, other information available fromcenter' reviews, audit reports, investigations, and othersources regarding compliance with provisions of this contract'Will also be considered.

If consideration and analysis of the above factors indicates anew contract is most advantageous to the Government, the optionwill not be exercised. If the analysis of the above factorsresults in a favorable determination that is advantageous tothe Government, the option may be exercised.

Attachment L

NOTE: ATTACHMENT L will be the completed worksheets for eachof the numerical standards for the center being com-peted. They will contain the initial calculation ofminimum and maximum ranges of acceptable performanceto assist offerors in responding to the RFP.

121

a.

118

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Quayle, on this particular point, askedthis question: In the Federal Register on February 1, 1984, the De.partment of Labor published the final notice of performance stand-ards for program year 19S4 to be applied to title II(A) of the JobTraining Partnership Act. These standards include such things asentered employment rate, the cost per person placed in a job, andaverage wage at placement.

When these same evaluation criteria are applied to the JobCorps, how do the results compare to the results for the title IIAprogram?

Mr. O'KEEFE. Frankly, I do not know. I think we will have to goback and develop an answer.

The CHAIRMAN. Will you submit that for us, if you have any an-swers.

Mr. JONES. We have never collected the data on a historical basisto run that kind of comparison. We will take a look at it. I am notsure what would be involved in doing it. If we will do it, we willconstruct it and supply it.

The CHAIRMAN. We do not have much experience to base it on,either, as of right now.

Mr. JONES. No; that is part of the problem here.The CHAIRMAN. It might be a good thing, though, to do.Mr. JONES. Also, the definitions, Mr. Chairman, are going to be

slightly different in terms of those categories.The CHAIRMAN. Sure.Mr. JONES. We will take a stab at it.The CHAIRMAN. Would you do what you can to give us some cor-

relation between the two? I think that would be helpful.I have seen photqgraphs, all taken within the past year, of nine

different Job Corps Centers,and I have had staff members go tothe various centers around the country. These pictures do revealan alarming discrepancy among the various centers. Some appearas comfortable as a college dormitory while others seem to violatea myriad of health and safety standards which I am concernedabout. That defeats the purpose of a residential program to providea positive atmosphere.

To what can you attribute these differences, and what do youpropose to do about them? Some of theM really are stark. We haveonly checkedwe 6nly have pictures from nine of the various cen-ters, but that is still a cross section.

Mr. O'KEEFE. Senator, when you have 107 different facilitiesaround the country, you can anticipate that there will be a vari-ance in their upkeep and their, status.

As Senator Randolph alluded earlier, some of these centers are20 or 25 years old. Therefore, they are probably reaching, the pointwhere the plant and equipment of that centet need to be reexam-ined. One of the things that we are undertaking, and Mr. Rell,since he took over as Director of the Job Corps, is instituting, is anassessment of the facilities' needs across the country in these 107centers. That is, in my view, the No. 1 priority of the comingmonths in terms of our administration of the program.

The CHAIRMAN. I don't think they all have to look like collegedormitories, but some of them are clearly below standards.

122

119

Mr. JONES. I think, Senator, we should add to that, also, that theone thins we have done each year is to ensure in the Job Corpsbudget, including 1985, that there are funds there to deal withthose kinds of basic health and safety reconstruction at centers. Weare doing a continual survey .of those, and we would hope that thekinds of things you have ssen have eithebeenerected or are inthe pipeline and correction is in the process.

The CHAIRMAN. I can assure you a number of them have notbeen corrected.. We hope they are in the pipeline.

That is one of the concerns I have: As you look at Job Corps, it isone of the few programswell, it is the only program I know ofthat really helps hard-core, unemployed youth. There are othersthat help, but I am talking about one that really targets this par-ticular group. Yet, we have failed to increase the budget for JobCorps now for the past 3 years.

Look, if the program works as well as I have seen it work, if itreally helps these kids who otherwise would have no hope for thefuture whatsoeverand I see the billions we throw down the drainin other programs that do not do one one-hundredth as much asJob CorpsI think maybe we need to have more emphasis on help-ing Job Corps to proceed and to grow and to accomplish even moreof the great things that they are doing.

Therefore, I am concerned when I see these architectural defi-ciencies and living deficiencies. I am not saying they have to be col-lege dormitories, but I am saying that there ought to be minimumstandards that these centers ought to have to meet,

If It is funding, then we ought to be willing to advocate to getadequate funding so that they can meet those.

Mr. O'KEEFE. I think. you make a very good point here. One ofthe things that we collectively have to do is we have to look at theJob Corps as an ongoing program with substantial needs both foroperations and capital. Over the coming months, I hope that youand your" staff and our staff will be able to examine this issue anddetermine how it is within scarce resources that we can achievethose objectives.

The CHAIRMAN. I appreciate. that, but keep in mind that we aredealing with kids that really are down. They are down. They arekids without a positive attitude for the most part. They come to aplace that has a lousy set of accommodations for them, and theirattitudes are not going to change very much.

One of the things that I have really, appreciated from some ,of theJob Corps Centers that I visited is that they have really made aneffort to make these places vibrant and attractive, and to helpthese kids away from home to be able to enjoy the totality of theexpe << ..^,enot just learning, not just vocational experience, butalso able to live.

Thus la something I hope we can all work on.It is my understanding that the architectural and engineenpg

contracting is being handled currently by a separate arm of ETA.Am I right on that?

Mr. Joiv Es. That is correct.The CHAIRMAN. How, then, do the Job Corps contractors notify

ETA about their structural problems in their centers? What is the

123 r ,

120

process for getting the needed ,...pairs done? Is it the same processas you use for emergencies?

Mr. JONES. Let us describe for you, Senator, the process for thewhole facility survey and how those things get done.

Mr. Ram. Senator, we have a regular program of facility surveyswhere architectural and engineering expertsI am not onemakevisits to centers on a biannual basis, to identify any deficienciesthat might exist. I would be happy to submit for the record whatthat looks like.

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, we will place that in therecord.

[Non: In the interest of economy, the report referred to entitled"Job Corps Centers Facility Survey Reports, February 1981," wasretained in the files of ithe committee, where it may be researchedupon request.]

The CHAIRMAN. Mention to those people that I am going to bechecking on them, and they may have to be up here to testify next.

I am concerned about the average length of time between thetime when a problem is reported and the contract 'to repair hasbeen signed.

Mr. RELL. In that regard, Senator, once a facilities survey teamgoes out to a center and comes up with its findings, there is a pre-liminary report. The center contractor and our regional office staffhave an opportunity to review that and to make their input. Withregard to programmatic type improvements, the center operatorhas an opportunity to suggest those as well before the facilitysurvey report is finalized. Based on those facility survey, reports,which are then aggregated at the national level, we prioritize theprojects that are to be funded within the available budget that wehave for that particular year.

Now how long does it take to actually fix them? Senator, thatvaries substantially. I think it takes approximately 3 to 6 monthsto contract for the architectural and engineering services that arenecessary for a major renovation. That period of time is the directproduct of the Federal regulations governing the procurement proc-ess for architectural and engineering services.

The CHAIRMAN. Wouldn't it be better to give the money to thelocal Job Corps Center and let them refurbish it themselves in ac-cordance with certain standards? Wouldn't you save money?Wouldn't you give them more opportunity? Or do you run into all.kinds of labor management problems?

Mr. JONES. You would run into two problems, Senator. One isthey would be subject to the same Federal procurement processesfor architectural and engineering kinds of contracting, reconstruc-tion contracting, as we would.

Second, you run into a series of local problems.Third, the most difficult problem in this business, as you know, is

that we are dealing with a fixed budget. Across 107 centers wehave to very carefully examine the priorities for which things youfix where they fall within that process.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you think this is an efficient system the wayit is working now or would it be better to have the surveys takenand then say, "Here's the money. You can repair it. "?

1244.

121

Mr. JONES. I suspect that is, at best, six of one and half a dozenof the other.

In the real question that you are asking, I do not know that itwould change the time frames that much, given the fact that manyof the specific steps they would have to go through are the same aswe would have to go through.

The CHAIRMAN. Sure.S. 2111 cites certain standards, minimum standards, for plant

and facilities. Po you think such uniformity is practical or desira-ble?

Mr. O'KEneE. Across the country we have 107 different nters. Ithink that we will, over the next 12 months, seek to estab h a setof standardt. We think the basic concept--, The CHAIRMAN. So it is desirable to do?

Mr. O'KEEFE. Yes, sir.The CHAIRMAN. Therefore, the bill itself is meaningful?Mr. O'KEEFE. The principle of establishing those standards is one

that we are very--The CHAIRMAN. Do you know why I want it' in legislation? The

reason I want it in legislation is so that you people, who have thevery difficult time running this organization, realize the'standardsyou have to meet. Congress will have to take a closer look at yourbudget situation.

However, we ought to set minimum standards, and we ought tomeet those standards. We ought to try to make this not only alearning, but a pleasant, uplifting experience for these youngpeople, which I think the good Job Corps Centers do. In the end, wewould all be farther ahead.

Mr. JONES. I think the issue of standards, Senator, is one that weare all going to agree with.

The difficulty because of the diversity of 107 centers that havecome online over the course of 20 years, many of which ar6 2ontrib-uted buildings of various sorts, is that the variance is very high.

The CHAIRMAN. We may not have the same type of buildings. Wemay not have the same type rooms or restroom facilities, or what-ever, but they have to at least meet a wide parameter of minimumstandards. The main standards is just having them be livable. Theyhave to be good for these kids to go to.

It has been stated, with regard to the administrative problems,that the Employment and Training Administration will carry out areduction inforce. Now where and how will this reduction inforcetake place? What will be the effect on the Job Corps Program?

Mr. O'KEEFE. The Employment and Training Administration willbe reduced over the next few months. The target date for theactual separation of employees will be about the end of May,middle to the end of May.

With respect to the Job Corps Program, there will be some reduc-, tions in force there to take advantage of some of the administrative

and management efficiencies that we have built in. I believe,though, we will still have adequate staff responsibilities. When weare done, we will havePeter, correct me if 1 am wrong on this-156 people still devoted to the Job Corps.

125

122

Mr. RELL. 151 in the regional offices and an, additional 46 in thenational office, Mr. Chairman, for a total of 197 after the RIF isover.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you consider that adequate, Mr. Rell?Mr. RELL. Senator, a program manager would always like to

have more staff. There is no question about that. However, in allfairness, I must say that i think we can do the job.

Mr. JONES. Senator, it is only about an 11-person shift from 1983to 1984 and on up through the line.

Senator RANDOLPH. Mr. Chairman, could I interrupt withoutbreaking your stream of questioning?

The CHAIRMAN. Sure.Senator RANDOLPH. I think we must realize that in this youth ,

bracket there are both young men and young women. Is that cor-rect?

Mr. O'KEEFE. Yes, Senator.Senator RANDOLPH. Now when we think in terms of a residential

program as we have in Charleston, the living conditions there arenaturally different than a Job Corps out in the countryside in theCounty of Jefferson in the Eastern Panhandle. Therefore, to have asameness, that is not even practical. However, we . certainly wantcleanliness, of course.

At Charleston we are essentially women. Of course, in the build-ing program, which includes sidewalks and communities in thearea, those are young men.

You recognize that; is that correct?Mr. RELL. Yes, sir.Senator RANDOLPH. I think there is a variable there, and we do

not want an identical type of, let's say, quarters. I do not think itwould, even be reasonable to expect it.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator.Any comments?Mr. O'KEEFE. I would just say that there is nothing in our plans

that would drive us to a sameness across the centers that we havein this country.

As the chairman was pointing out, we do want to make sure thatthe minimum standards that are there for health and for safety,and the environment generally, are conducive to the students'learning new occupations and improving their basic educational

r. competencies.Senator RANDOLPH. I, of course, am supportive of your position,

but I am only saying that the questioning indicated that perhapssome were better than others, and so forth. Rather than beingbetter than others or worse than others, there are the natural vari-ables that we must understand in the type, of camp and the workthat is done by the Job Corps.

Mr. JONES. Yes, sir.The ,CHAIRMAN. As I understand it, you had 255 staffers back in

1979, and you are now down to 197. However, you feel you can getby with that many? You would !Le more, but as long as the budget$600 million, you feel you can get by? Is that a fair statement?

Mr. RELL. Yes. I believe that we can carry out our responsibil-ities at that level.

126LP

128

The CHAIRMAN. It is a significant reduction, though. It is about20 percent.Mr. O'KEEFE. Senator, it occurs in the context, I think, of im-

proved administration of the Employment and Training Adminis-tration across the board.

In Mr. Rell, we have one of our finest senior managers runningthe progtam. He is bringing to bear many management improve-ments Mit were not there in 1979.

We also have present a very vigil office of the inspector general.Within ETA we have an office of Program and Fiscal Integrity,which further bolsters our oversight of the programs. I think thereare resources outside those roughly 200 people.

The CHAIRMAN. OK, but you know what I am concerned about.We had $600-plus million in 1981 in the budget. Now it is down to$600 million. Even though a slight 'increase in inflation duringthose years, we really have not increased the budget.

Second, we are talkijig about people here, young men andwomen, who really'do not have any hope anywhere else. They justdo not have a chance. To me, a great society should take care andprovide opportunities for those who cannot help themselves.

I think we provide a lot of opportunities for those who can butwon't when we ought to be doing morn for those who really can't,especially when you have the success ratio that the Job Corpsreally provides.

I understand why Dave Stockman and others at OMB wanted tocut out Job Corps at a savings of $618 million at one point. Frank-ly, they did not yet understand how important this program is andwhat it really does. They have the job to try to get the budget

. under control, and everybody knows it is running out of control.I think we ought to cut other programs that really are not doingthe job and increase the ones that really are. That is what I amconcerned about here, because I see these young kids who come out

of there, who get jobs and become constructive contributors to s i-ety, compared to what they would have been. They would avebeen dependent on society for all of their lives if they had not hadpethis Job Corps experience.

I really believe we need to advocate a little stronger for the JobCorps, and at the same time maybe advocate a little strongerandSenator Randolph and I can work on the other side of thatforsavings in some of these programs where people could do a littlemore for themselves, because they have the capacity, the educa-

. tion, and the opportunities. Maybe we ought to quit supporting somany of those programs so we can do an even better job with theothers.

That is why I like the handicapped programs. A lot of thosepeople can help themselves. They just need a break. They just needan opportunity.

I think that is what the Federal Government role really can andshould be.Senator RANDOLPH. I mention only one program as our able

chairman mentions the word "handicapped." Let us remembertoday the opposition that we had to legislation I offered in 1936, togive the blind of our country an opportunity to be entrepreneurs inthe marketplace. I remember so very well those hearings. I consist-

127.r

124

ently heard from the witness table and others that it was all verywell to have it feeling toward the blind, but they could not do thesejobs. They could not do them.

The program was to give the blind the opportunity to operatevending facilities in all the Federal buildings of the United States,where it was practical. I report to you that in 1982 we had 3,729blind persons who are self-employed., you realize. They are operat-ing, these facilities, and are employing others.

Take a trip downtown to the Justice Department and see the op-eration of the vending facility there. Blind vendors had averageearnings in 1982 of $16,007. These were people that we had askedto sit in dark corners from almost the beginning of their lives.

I remember hearings where someone said, "But they can't dothese jobs." Let's say, as I said then, "Well, let's give them the op-portunity. If it fails, of course then we have. failed."

In 1982 blind vendors sold about 269 million dollars' worth ofitems that people buy in this country. The program is not now onlyin Federal buildings, but it is also in State buildings.

As the chairman so correctly says, give people the oppoitunity towork rather than to receive relief.

Do you agree with that sort of thinking?Mr. RELL. Yes, sir. That is what the Job Corps is all about, sir.Senator RANDOLPH. It is all about that, absolutely.The CHAIRMAN. I suggest that we ought to do more to perhaps

strengthen it even though we have terrible budget problems. Wecannot solve every problem in society through the central farm ofgovernment. There have to be volunteer organizations and a lot ofother things, but I think that it worries me that we have. had so

ay attacks on Job Corps, and in light of the record the JobCorps has.

There are deficiencies. We know there are some situations whereit really does not function the way it should function. We knowthat there are deficiencies in architectural and engineering stand-ards, for example. But, across the board, it is a program that every-one who looks at the Job Corps seriously, realizes the problemsthat these youth have in society, looks at the success of the pro-gram, cannot help but support it.

Let me ask just one other question because I have to get to thenext panel. You have been very helpful to us here today.

Would you explain the Department of Labor's rationale for set-ting aside the longstanding contract with the Joint Action andCommunity Service, the JACS organization, and trying to put therecruitment of followup functions out for competitive bid?

Mr. O'KEEFE. The decision made approximately 1 year ago to putout for competition the contract to which you refer was based onthe underlying policy of the Job Corps and the Employment andTraining Administration and the Department generally that com-petition will achieve for us the optimum mix of service level andcost that, as administrators of the moneys that you appropriate tous, we have a responsibility for spending as best we can.

The JACS contract is one which is being competed regionally atthe present time. They are still in business through the remainderof this fiscal year. I believe it is through the fiscal year.

128

125

As you know, we recently had some litigation on that. We weretaken to court. Last night Judge Oberdorfer's ruling came out infavor of the Department, upholding our basic commitment there tocompeting that contract.) The CHAIRMAN. All right: That is very helpful.Senator Randolph?Senator RANDOLPH. I think that you have been very forthright in

answering questions and giving initiatives from the witness tableas well as to consider our questions.

I ask you, are you in favor of farming out this program or keep-ing it as it is now withih the Park Service and other agencies?

Mr. O'KEEFE. Senator, we are committedyour question goes tothe administration of centers by the Departments of Agricultureand Interiorwe are committed across the board to making thosecenters competitive with the centers that are administered by theDepartment of Labor. There is a significant cost differential amongthe centers based on whether they are CCC versus those which theDepartment competes. It is in that context that we are currentlydiscussing with .Agriculture and Interior how best to bring thosecoststo close .that gap.

Senator RANDOLPH. Are you saying that those under the ParkServicefor example, at Harpers Ferrythat that is a. failure?

Mr. O'KEEFE. No, sir. What I am saying is that there is a signifi-cant difference in the cost per Corps member that we serve thereversus other renters throughout the country. What we want toachieve is a reduction in that differential, so that of the $600 mil-lion that we have,. we can serve the largest number of participants.With any fixed budget, if the unit costs increase, that means thatwe will eventually result in serving fewer people.

Senator RANDOLPH. However, you do not say necessarily that im-provement cannot be made within the Park Service?

Mr. O'KEEFE. We are discussihg with Interior and Agriculture atthe present time ways in which we can close that gap. Their in-volvement in the program is not something that we have closedout.

Senator RANDOLPH. I appreciate that.Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator; we appreciate your ques-

tions.Thank you all for coming. We appreciate the comments and your

statements. We will look forward to receiving additional informa-tion which you are going to provide to us.

Our next panel will consist of four representatives from firmsthat operate the Job Corps Centers and provide training for theprogram's students: Mr. O.H. Simmons, corporate secretary ofMinact, Inc., of Jackson, MI; Mr. John Gaines, president c Tele-dyne Economic Development Co., Los Angeles, CA; Mr. Herb Wat-kins, vice president of Career Systems at Singer Corp, Rochester,NY; and Dr. Robert L. Marquardt, the chairman .and president ofManagement and Training Corp. in Ogden, UT.

Mr. Simmons, why don't we begin with you? In the interest oftime, I would appreciate it if you would limit your oral presentation to no more than 5 minutes for each of you, because I wouldlike to hear all four of you before I have to go to testify about our

40-081 0-84-9

29

126

committee budget before the Rules Committee. I have to be there. Icannot miss that. However, I would like to hear all four you testify.Therefore, if you will limit your comments to 5 minutes, we willplace all of your written statements into tht record. We are build-ing a record in this ma.,`,er.

We will turn to you first, Mr. Simmons.

STATEMENT OF O.N. SIMMONS, CORPORATE SECRETARY,MINACT, INC.. JACKSON, MS

Mr. SIMMONS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.I appreciate the opportunity of being here to testify.Before I came with Minact, which is a Mississippibased corpora-tion that currently operates four Job Corps Centers, I served 411/2years with the Mississippi Employment Security Commission.When I retired, I was executive director of that organization. So Ihave had a number of years of experience in the various training

programs operated by the Department of Labor and other Federaland State agencies.After I graduated from high school, I entered the CCC and serveda year in that. So I have had both ends of it. I was an enrollee in

193? and 1938, prior to college.Senator RANDOLPH. Where did you do ydur CCC work?Mr. SIMMONS. Richton, MS, Senator Randolph.Senator RANDOLPH. Then the structure, if I may say, was twopronged.Mr. SIMMONS. Yes, sir.Senator RANDOLPH. The work in the field was civilian---Mr. SIMMONS. Yes, sir..Senator RANDOLPH [continuing]. And in the camp operation--Mr SIMMONS. We were in the Army jurisdiction in the camps,yes.The CHAIRMAN. Senator Randolph has been here 51 years-52

years, I guess. He knows all these programs.Mr. SIMMONS. I have heard Senator Randolph give a history ofthe Wagner-Peyser Act on a couple different occasions. It is veryenjoyable.The CHAIRMAN, He has been making an attempt to educate meever since I have been here, and he has done a pretty good job of it.Senator RANDOLPH. Just think of passing legislation today thatwould make it mandatory that a person in the program send somany dollars home to his father and mother or wife, and just

wonder where you would get with that.The CHAIRMAN. That is right. Go ahead, Mr. Simmons.Mr. SIMMONS. We had that in the old CCC when I was goingthere.Senator RANDOLPH. Yes, sir.Mr. SIMMONS. As has been indicated by you and some of the De-

partment of Labor people, I just do not see how we can maintainthe program that we have with $600 million, Senator Hatch and ,Senator Randolph. We had $618 million or better this year. Withinflation, although inflation has slowed considerably, there is stillthat factor and it is going to require, in my opinion, additionalfunds above the $600 million.

130

127

Now in my experience with the Employment Security Commis-sion, I beganin Mississippi we did all the recruitment and all theplacement, and I Can tell you from experience the Job Corps hasthe best success rate of any training program that has ever beenoperated or is currently being operated. That is not hearsay;.that isfrom experience that I have had over the years.You have indicated the need to upgrade some of the facilities,and there is no doubt that there is a big need in this area. Withthe $600 million, there is no way, in my opinion, that that is goingto be able to be accomplished without cutting out some of the Corpsmembers or cutting out even some of the centers.There are some questions that have been asked this morning andsome answers made on the vocational training. We need to main-tain the state-of-the-art equipment in the vocational training area.Some of the centers, some of our centers, have very old equipmentthat we are trying to train the kids on. Now we have been verysuccessful, but we do need to maintain the state of the art insofaras equipment is concerned that we are training on.One of the things that has been mentioned already this morningin the basic education. We feeland I certainly subscribe to thisthat without adequate basic education you cannot absorb the voca-tional training in a lot of instances as needed. 'Therefore, we put agreat deal of emphasis on basic education in our centers.I was certainly happy to see that in Senate bill 2111 that youstressed this phase of the training program.We also believe that residential living is an integral part of thetraining because so many of these youngsters, as has been intimat-ed already here this morning, come from environments that arejustit is hard for us to realize what the environments are. Resi-dential living is a very integral part in order to get them ready toenter the world of work and operate in the society in which wehave to operate.One of the things that I think we need to do is to look very close-ly at computer-based instruction in the basic education. This notonly enhances the learning ability, but it cuts out some of thedrudgery with the enrollees that we have.We have in our St. Louis Center premilitary training, we call it,Senator Hatch. It i entirely voluntary, but this has been one ofthe best things insofar as generating pride, patriotism. It has givenus a great deal of help with the Community Relations Council andthrough the general public. They see these kids in the premilitarytraining and the pride and patriotism. It enhances that. We justget a lot of support for that one voluntary program.The CHAIRMAN. I agree with that. We have that out in Utah, andit really creates discipline and a lot of other things.Mr. Simmons, your 5 minutes are up. Do you have any othermajor point?Mr. SIMMONS. I do want to say that insofar as the private con-tractors are concerned, I think that the private sectorgoing tothe private sector is in keeping with the intent of the Job TrainingPartnership Act that was enacted a couple years ago by the Con-gress.[The prepared statement of Mr. Simmons follows:]

131

128'

Testimony before

The Senate Labor Committee

November is, 1983,

My name is 0. H. Simmons. I am Corporate Secretary of MINACT,

Inc., a Mississippi based corporation that currently operates

four job corpp centers. These centers are locatel in Knoxville

(Tennessee)",' Batesville (Mississippi), St. Louis Lnd Excelsior

Springs, Missouri, Prior to my joining MINACT, Inc., I spent

forty-one and one-half years with the Mississippi Employment

Security Commission and at my retirement.was Executive Director

of that organization. During my tenure with the'Mississippi

Employment Security Commission, I had an opportunity to be

involved in job corps operations since its Inception in 1965.

Before entering college and immediately after graduation from

high school in 1937, I entered the Civilian Conservation Corps

(CCC) which in reality is the forerunner of the'job corps

program. For these reasons I feel I am'eminently qualified to

present testimony to this Committee concerning the effectiveness

and needs of the Job Corps program.

132

129

There is no question that we need to maintain a budget of at

least 618 million dollars for FY 85 since there mre'currently

thousands of youth who are waiting to take advantage of the

excellent training they can reeeive through this program. The

unemployment statistics for young people, particularly minority

youth, vividly points up this need. 'Mississippi youth have

always taken advantage of the Job Corps program in relatively

large numbers. Through my work with the Employment Security

Commission, I was able to see the excellent training that is

taking place throughout the United State's. .1n fact, for a number

of years Mississippi had a one of the highest'placement rate of

returning Job corps enrollees of any state even during the

current tough economic times, the rate has not shown any

substantial drop. For this reason, I consider Job Corps to be

the most successful training program currently being operated.

A decrease in funding for this program would cause a farther

deterioration in the training facilities, many of which are in

dire need of renovation and maintenance. You are aware Of

course, that the majority of the centers were built for some

other purpose than Job Corps activities and were renovated to

accommodate the program. Many of these facilities are old and

require a great deal of maintenance and rehabilitation. Many are

133

130

badly in need of capital improvements to bring them or keep them

up to the minimum standards that are required to train:young

people.

Although placement has been good to excellent historically, I am

concerned about equipment for the vocational skills that are

currently being offered which, in many instances, has not kept

pace with "the state of the art." It is imperative that in order

for the job corps graduates to remain competitive in the

workforce that they must be trained on the latest equipment being

used by industry throughout the country in the particular

occupation for which they receive training. Many of the centers

need funds to upgrade equipment so that the young people can be

adequately trained to meet the needs of the labor for ',e.

Contractors (operators) are continually striving to improve the

basic education programs for the enrollees and we consider this

the "cornerstone" of the total program. Without proper basic

education, it is almost impossible for a young person to

adequately absorb the vocational/technical training being

offered. New techniques for improving the basic education

instruction are continually being developed and it is imperative

that the job corps stay abreast and provide the latest techniques

and equipment for this important phase of the youth's training.

134

,.tatiea

131

In an attempt to keep pace with the recent' technological trend

which currently exist in our society, there is an urgent need to

Implement Computer-Based Instruction in the Job Corps training

programs.

Computer Based Instruction is one of the newer trends to improve

educational effectiveness in the classroom. It enhances the

ability of individual teachers to reach students while, at the

same time reduce drudgery of repetitive teaching on the

enrollees. Moreover, Computer Based Education greatly enhances

the overall learning process.

Residential living quarters are in many instances badly in need

of capital improvements and funds have pot been available in the

last several years to provide the renovations which are needed.

We at MINACT, Inc. consider the residential living component an

Integral part of the trains g since many of the enrollees come

from environments that do n t adequately instill In them the

values that society will d mend of them when they become workers

in the'industrial complex.

Due to the unsettled situnjtion throughout the world we are

convinced that pre- militarly training is a strong plus for job

135

132

corps enrollees . We have this training at the St. Louis Center

'and it has proven to be very popular with the corpsmembers. It

has brought a strengthening of support from the communiq

relations council and the general public, who ape highly

complimentary concerning the pride and patriotism that is being

generated through the pre-military program.

The Advanced Career Training program needs to be reinstituted.

Many corpsmembers'have benefited from this program in the past

and many more can still benefit from such a program. Through the

Advanced Training Program, several students have completed

advanced level degrees, and have done exceptionally well in their

areas of expertise. We hasten to point out that funding for this

component should be separate and apart from the regular program.

We feel that the awarding of contracts to private industry for

the operation of the job corps centers is the most effective way t

to operate and we encourage expansion and continuat' of this

method for ensuring the most cost-effective and best training

ava4Jable for our young people. In our opinion this is in

keeping with the recently enacted Job Corps Training Partnership

Act that encourages more involement In the private sector In the

federally supported trotting programs. We at MINACT, Inc. are

extremely proud of the success we have had in training the young

people assigned to the centers which we operate and particularly

136

188

in the records they hew) achieved.

The plea today, Mr. Chairman, is that sufficient funds be

provided to improve upon theonerations that are currently being

carried out and that the regional and national staff be

strengthened in order to assure that each contractor carries out

the terms of his contract that will provide the maximum benefits

to the'youth of this country.

We appreciat, most sincerely the opportunity of presenting this

testimony ant.' will be glaekto answer any questions.,

137

0

134

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, sir.Mr. Gaines, let's turn to you. You are president of Teledyne Eco-

nomic Development Co. We appreciate having you here today.

STATEMENT OF JOHN GAINES, PRESIDENT, TELEDYNEECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CO., LOS ANGELES, CA

Mr. GAINES. It is a pleasure to be here.Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, as I said before, it

is certainly a pleasure to be here and discuss a program that I haveheard nothing but good things about today, and I am certainly'pleased to have heard all these.

The Teledyne Corp. operates nine Job Corps Centers throughoutthe United States. One of these Centers is located in Gainesville,FL. We have a supervisor at that Center named Randy Bennett.He was an eighth grade dropout. He joined Job Corps a few yearsage and received 18 months' training at the Earl C. Clements JobCorps' Center in Kentucky. This was not a Teledyne center. As amatter of fact, it was run_by the_Singer Corp., my compatriott_the left. I have to say that.

The CHAIRMAN. That transcends paternalism. [Laughter.]Mr. GAINES. During that training he received his GED [his gener-

al equivalency diploma], that you mentioned before, and vocationalskills training. He then, through an ACT Program that is a portionof the Job Corps, and which at this moment has been somewhatdownplayed, but ACT puts out money to deserving students whoare able to qualify for college and if is a minor part of Job Corps atthis moment, but during the time this young man was in his train-ing he did get ACT funds through Job Corps and attended a collegecalled Lane in Jackson, TN, where he got a BA in sociology. Mindyou, I am talking about an eighth grade dropout at this, moment intime.

In 1979 Teledyne employed him to work in our Gainesville JobCorps Center, and it, October 1982 this young man was invited toWashington to attend the signing of the new Job Training Partner-ship Act, which I gw ss they call JTPA, or I am not quite sure ofthe short terminology for it, but it is the Job Training PartnershipAct.

I would like to rend his company trip report, and it is very short.I know I only have 5 minutes, but I think you will enjoy listeningto it. Again, I repeat, this is an eighth grade dropout that we arestarting with, and here is what. he is saying. He sent this to hissupervisor who sent it to his supervisor, who sent it to someone,who sent it to me. It appeared qn my desk, and here is what hesays:

"I arrived at the Department of Labor Building in ,Washington,DC, at 10 aim. on October 13, 1982, and was introduced to severalJob Corps officials and several Department of Labor officials. Fromthere, we departed for the White House at 10:30 a.m.

"We entered the White House gates at 10:45 a.m with two otherJob Corps graduates and 15 graduates from various job trainingprograms. We were greeted in the White House reception room byseveral White House officials and Secretary I)onovan.

148

135

"From there, we were taken A) the Cabinet Room where we hadthe opportunity to talk with 1dr: Donovan about the new JobsTraining Program. At that time President Reagan came into theroom. We were all introduced to him and had the opportunity toask him questions and say a little something about ourselves.

"I indicated to President Reagan that, prior to entering the JobCorps Program, I had an eighth grade education with very little'op-portunity to do any better whatsoever, but, thanks to Job Corps, Iwas able to get my GED, skill training, and a college diploma. I ex-plained to him that since being with Job Corps I had. had the op-portunity to see and hear thousands of young people being helpedby this program. I indicated to the President that I would sincerelylike to thank him for his support of the Job Corps Program.

"After a round of jelly beans and, several waves of photogra-phers, we left the Cabinet Room for the Executive Office Building,where we lined, up on stage for the signing of the Jobs TrainingPartnership Act.

"While I stood beside Secretary Donovan, President Reagan de-livered a speech to White Rousa-officials and a-number -of report-ers. He indicated in his speech that those present were examples oftraining for jobs where individuals an become taxpayers, not taxburdens.

"We all gathered behind the President while he signed the newbill into law. The President then asked us all a few questions.When he was preparing to leave the room, I had the opportunity toshake his hand and indicate to the President 'that it was a pleasureto meet him."

That, members of this committee, in my opinion, is what JobCorps is all about. The key words here are, "taxpayers, not tax bur-dens." I know, Mr. Chairman, you indicated that quite eloquentlyearlier, but I want to repeat it again. My God, it's "taxpayers, nottax burdens," and that is the key to this whole program.

The approximately 80,000 young people, ages 16 to 21, who re-ceive training each year are from poverty level families, as was in-dicated. I have been watching all of this for 20 years and have beenresponsible for my particular center during those years, and Icannot emphasize that enough.

I know I come from the "land of milk and honey" out there inCalifornia,. but, by God, when I have seen some of those kids andwhere they come from and what they are able to do after thistraining, it has to tear you up.

They come to Joh Corps with fifth grade reading and math skilllevels, and that is another difficult thing. I know this was broughtup before, but I wanted to make a point of it again. That is whatwe are dealing with. They are unemployable. The Job Corps givesthem a chance to become taxpaying citizens.

During the 18 years that I and Teledyne have been involved inthis program, I have read many letters similar to the story aboutRandy Bennett --not with the jelly beans and the current Presi-dent, but, nevertheless, many stories that, if you read them, it hasto really get to you.

I have to say from my standpointand we, Teledyne, are in-volved in a lot of other activities, aerospace, and so forth and so on,

, which are certainly important to this country. However, this pro-

1 3 9

136

gram, when you really get into it, is beyond belief and it is gratify-ing to me to noteI know you have been to Clearfield, and I knowthat several others on the committee have been around to the vari- /bus centers. With regard to the centers that Teledyne runs, we hadSenator, Hawkins from your committee visit our centers in Florida.We have had Senator Nickles visit our center in Oklahoma, Guth-rie, OK. Senator Kennedy has visited our center in Grafton, MA.

I will tell you, I believe a visit to any Job Corps Center. makes itplain to see why Job Corps is a success.

I have submitted a prepared statement, which ;s longer thanwhat I have been through.

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, we will put it in the record.[The prepared statement of Mr. Gaines follows:]

O

1 '10

137

TELEDYNE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMPANY11340 West Olympic Blvd.

Los Angeles, California 90064

Testimony ofJohn W. Gaines

PresidentTeledyne. Economic Development Company

Before theCommittee on Labor and Human Resources

United States' Senateon

The Job Corps Program

141

138

Introduction

Teledyne has been operating Job Corps Centers for the pasteighteen (18) years. We currently operate Centers in Phoenix,Arizona; Tucson, Arizona; Albuquerque, New Mexico; Roswell,New Mexico; Guthrie, Oklahoma, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania;Grafton., Massachusetts; Gainesville, Florida and Jacksonville,Florida. The following statement covers:

Job Corps Budget and PersonnelBasic Job Corps ProgramsJob Corps Center FacilitiesAdditional Job Corps Programs

All of the following comments concern TRAINING. Trainingis what this program is all about. The Job Corps enrollsdisadvantaged young people (ages 16-.1) who are usuallyhie) school dropouts -- with no place to go but down -- andtrains them. Trains them to be PRODUCTIVE - EMPLOYABLECITIZENS. It is not an easy task. It is a task thiscountry cannot afford to ignore. 1-t.--is-a-task 'hat is nowbeing done by JOB CORPS. The direct and. indirect dollarreturn to the United States Taxpayer far exceed' the costof this program.

Job Corps Budget and Personnel

Job Corps is the most successful sociallaboratory in thecountry. to research and implement methods of breaking thepoverty cycle. The great strides made by the program overthe past eighteen (18) year,, have proven this repeatedly.If a corpsmember is to succeed in a job, he or she, mustpossess skills in five interrelated areas: Vocational,educational, physical, living and social. This is whatJob Corps provides. As Mathematics Policy Research of'Princeton, New Jersey has found, "the average investmentper corpsmember is paid back in approximately three years".With the proven success rate of the more than 1,000,030youngsters who have profited by Job Corps, it can be trulysaid that congressional appropriations have been and continueto be well spent. In terms o, real dollars, the budget forJob Corps has decreased over the years but Job Corps hassteadily improved its program.' I hardly need say that theemployment situation for the youth of this country needsspecial attention. Basic skills and attitudes necessary.for employment are of utmost importance. Job Corps is asuccessful vehicle for providing disadvantaged youth withthese skills. It is an outstanding demonstration of thejoining of industry, labor, government and youth into asuccessful program, Budget considerations continues to

142

139

plague us all. I am sure that when your committee reviewsthe Job Corps budget for FY'84 and future years, thisworthwhile program will receive the consideration it deserves.

A matter of concern in the personnel area, is the currentDOL "RIF" policies. The loss and replacement of DOL personnelpossessing many years of experience in Job Corps is creatinga "knowledge gap which is hurting this program. We allrecognize the tremendous pressure government is underregarding budgets. However, there is a great need forstable and experienced government personnel for this programand I hope all due consideration can be given to maintainingqualified DOL staff.

Vocational and Skills Training

The vocational learning environment at Job Corps.Centersmanifests the philosophy of individualized training,complimented by the development of skills and confiden.cein each corpsmember. The Center's vocational training isdesigned with a focus on each individual's current positionin the working world, his/her employment expectations, andthe establishment of realistic goals and development ofskills to attain them.

Curriculum insures that individual abilities are exercisedin the acquisition of specific skills required for employment.Opportunity is continually available to practice these skillsIn order to stimulate motivation. Motivation is furtherincreased through progressive accomplishment of tasks. Alltraining experiences are directly supported by vocationallyrelated reading and math.

Job Corps is well aware that conventional methods of traininghave not worked in the Job Corps target population. Therefore,instructional techniques and methods are designed to cope withcorpsmembers who have a history of difficulty in training ornegative attitudes toward it.

The Job Corps Program teaches young people how to work. JobCorps has been a national leader in developing competencybased vocational programs within the system. This vocationalimprovement effort with all its thrust must he maintained. Iurge the Senate to take special care to see that these effortsof the Department of labor continue to receive the necessaryattention for success.

Basic Education

The Job Corps education program emphasizes basics. Readingand math skills are stressed. The acquisition of a GED, forthose without a high school diploma, is paramount for job

-2-

143

II

140

placement in many occupations. Training in other social andliving skills takes place to address behaviors which havecaused the youth problems at home and at work.

We have developed within Job Corps a very strong and successfulbasic education program geared towards individuals moving attheir own pace to reach common goals. The GED program developedfor Job Corps is utilized by many non-Job Corps organizations.Teledyne is particularly proud of a Learning Disabilitiesprogram developed by the Gainesville Center in conjunctionwith the University of Florida. This program is the mostextensive one of its kind dealing with adolescent learningproblems. It will soon be utilized nationally. These prOgramsillustrate the Basic Education areas strengths.

Job Corps has designed a program that blends superiorinstruction with sensitivity to the needs of the disadvantagedyoung person. Learning is made interesting, individualizedto the corpsmember's abilities and interests, and geared tothe demands of'the job market.

Job Corps defines learning as an interaction with one'senvironment that prompts a ctinge in behavior. The challengefor the Job Corps staff is to direct corpsmember's interactionswith their environment so as tohelp them deal more successfullywith the working world.

Job Corps taps cor:-nember's innate capacity to master tasksthey have not attempted. First, it stimulates their desireto learn and persevere in the task; and, second, it allowsthem the time their abilities require to master it.

Accordingly, Job Corps is guided by the following precepts indesigning the Job Corps Center's educational training programto be of greatest benefit to the corpsmembers:

o Individualized instruction promotes effectivelearning.

o Most corpsmembers can master the learning taskif it is presented effectively and if they areallowed as much time to practice and absorb itas their individual ability requires..

o In order to be mastered, a learning experiencemust be meaningful to the learner. Instructorsshould continually demonstrate how the subject

-matter will be useful to corpsmembers.

Learning is measurable and should be measured.

144

141

o Effective learning requires the learner's activeparticipation.

o The goal of learning is to enable the learner toapply knowledge, skills, or attitudes to his/herown life.

The education staff of the Job Corps gives all corpsmembersindividual attention to insure that they have chi opportunityto leave the program with a GED, tp master the skills neededto locate and progress in a job that offers upward mobility,and to attain the self-confidence and knowledge necessary tolive independently while working with others in our society.

To meet corpsmember's needs, the education staff works closelywith individual corpsmembers in three main areas:

Academic education (math, reading, and GED)--tohelp corpsmembers acquire all the knowledge andskills they are capable of attaining.

Vocational support to prepare corpsmembers withthe skills necessary to,find and keep the jobthat offers upward mobility. The academiceducation staff works with the vocational staffin developing vocational vocabulary sheets andwriting corpsmember activity guides to enablecorpsmembers to understand the vocationalmaterials used in the various shops.,

Social development to encourage personal growth,social skills, and independence.

These three areas work in conjunction with all components ofthe Center to assure that corpsmembers receive a well developedand thorough training experience.

Residential Living

The aspect of Job Corps which truly distinguishes it from themajority of other training programs is its 'residential element.Center Life includes many components -- counseling, orientation,recreation, health services, enrollee support, and, of course,residential living. All of these areas assist the youth to liveindependently after leaving the program.

During the past three (3) years, Job Corps has made a concertedeffort to improve this area. A Training Academy for ResidentialAdvisors has been established at the Clearfield, Utah Center.

40-061 0- 8/ - -10 145

Emphasis has been placed on group dynamics and intergrouprelations. The residential living program is designed toprovide corpsmembers with the maximum opportunity to develop

, patterns of living that help them succeed in their educationaland vocational training and build a rewarding personal life.Positive behavioral change can be produced only in an environmentof trust, confidence, and successful experiences. The

.residential program provides a base of stability, must motivatethe corpsmember to change unacceptable behavior, and continueslong enough for the corpsmember to feel comfortable and securein new patterns of living and behavior.

To create such an environment,. Job Corps has designed theresidential living program to meet the following objectives:

Provide each corpsmember with safe, secure, andhealthful physical surroundings.

Enable each corpsmember to better cope with thedemands of living as a responsible member ofsociety and to relate to peers and authorities.

Provide professional counseling to meetindividual needa.

Promote interest in productive leisureexperiences.

Reinforce positive behavioral change bygiving praise, privileges, and greaterresponsibility.

Desired corpsmember behavior is maintained by specifying aminimal number of rules consistent with Job Corps requirements,acquainting staff and corpsmembers with the need for them, andtraining the staff in enforcing them appropriately.

Physical Plants

The physical plants of Job Corps are as divefte as there areJob Corps Centers. Continuous work needs to be done on thesesites to keep them at proper health And safety levels forcorpsmembers in their training. I urge continued attentionto the Job Corps facilities which now exist.

Equipment Needs

fAs well as Job Corps does in its vocational training efforts,it has been hampered by the lack of funds to utilize currenttraining equipment. Corpsmembers, when placed on Work Experience,

146

148

are often confronted with machinery they have never seen. Weview the ability of Job Corps to keep current with the needs\ of the vocational trades now being offered at Center's as oneof the most important requirements of the future Job Corpsvocational program.

Pre- liter

Teledyn- supports the proposed relationship between Job Corpsand the arious branches of the Armed Services. Our understandingof the pr ram, is that youth which attempt to enlist but failthe Armed ervices Vocational Appitude Battery are referred bythe military recruiter to the Joh Corps program. These youthwill be sent o selected centers to receive up to a year ofacademic and p e-military training (no weapons). After suchtraining and as uming the individual can now pass the ASVAB,he/she will be i ducted into his/her selected military branch.

Pre- military entollTent in Job Corps by youth interested injoining the armed forces should be encouraged. The systemwill provide these pre-military youth training with theirpeers. Job Corps can 'Contribute significantly to the militaryreadiness of the country by the use of its basic skills program.The adjustment that your can make during their group lifeexperiences will profit the military in many different ways.I urge the support of this rogram as it enters its firstphase of experimentation.

:\National Training Academies \

During the past two years, the Residential Training Academy-located at the Clearfield Job Corps, Center has trainedresidential staff from across the country in successfultechniques to manage Center Life programs. All staff fromTeledyne Centers who have attended haVe great,y complimentedtheir training experience. We support this program and urgeits continuance.

'Advance Career Training

The ACT Program, while in existence from 1978 through 1981,gave those qualified corpsmembers an opportunity to enrollin college and fully realize their potential. Teledynebelieves that the Advanced Career Training Program (ACT) isa very worthwhile adjutant to basic Job Corps. We stronglyrecommend that this program be continued within budgetaryconsiderations.

147

144

In closing, I would like to comment to this Committee, thatJob Corps may be compared to another program supported byCongress. I compare the Job Corps program with the GI Billwhich was passed shortly after World War II. The GI Billlegislation has proven to be one of the wisest legislativebills passed and supported by Congress in this century. I

believe Job Corps, although on a smaller scale, can beincluded in this category.

Thank you for this opportunity to share with you, my insightsconcerning Job Corps.

148

A

146

The CHAIRMAN. We appreciate your testimony.I might mention that I am being staffed this morning by Jerry

Bond, who is a Job Corps graduate, who went, on to Weber StateCollege and became a great football star there, and is going to con-tinue his education while he works with me.

I understand what you are saying.I was headed for Europe and I was at Kennedy Airport. My wife,

Elaine, and I were walking down the aisle or down the ramp, andthere was this very dignified young black woman there who waswalking, and we passed her. We got about three or four stepsbeyond her, and she said, "Senator Hatch?"

I said, "Yes." I said, "Do I know you?"I could not help but notice her because she was so composed, and

she just looked like the model of confidence.She said, "Well, I met you up at the Clearfield Job Corps

Center."I said, "Well, what are you doing here?"She said, "I just graduated from the Clearfield Job Corps

Center."I said, "What are you going to do?"She said, "I am a graduate, and .I am here to get a job."She had so mach confidence and poise that there is no doubt in

my mind that she not only got a job, but she is going to be one ofthese terrific people who make so much difference in our society.

You just have to have a few of those experienceryid you realizewhat a great job you people do.

Mr. GAINES. How true.The CHAIRMAN. Now, there are some who are not doing a great

job. We want to upgrade those.We appreciate your testimony.Mr. Watkins, we know that Singer does a lot of work in this

area. We appreciate having you here. We will turn to your testimo-ny at this time.

STATEMENT OF HERB W. WATKINS, VICE PRESIDENT AND GEN-ERAL MANAGER, THE SINGER CO., CAREER SYSTEM, ROCHES-TER, NY

Mr. WATKINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.I am general manager of Career Systems, a division and oper-ation of the Singer Co. We operate 12 Job Corps Centers.Our experience, however, is far broader than just Job Corps oper-

ations. We have conducted programs in public schools, on Indianreservations, in correctional institutions, in industry, and for theU.S. military,

Our vocational' assessment system, which we developed idimarilyfor Job Corps purposes, is used in over a thousand public and pri-vate schools, vocational rehabilitation facilities, and other contractoperations. We are marketing vocational assessment and trainingprograms as well as products to the JTPA service delivery area.

In 1983 we operated two JTPA dislocated worker programs. Imention this only to give validity to the statement I am about tomake,

149

146

In our judgment, Job Corps is the most successful program fortraining disadvantaged yquth, and particularly the hardest toemploy segment.

I have seen the program in my years come under attack at differ-ent times and during different administrations. It has sti,vived be-cause of its widespread, bipartisan congressional supportsupport,I believe, that is engendered by proven performance.

I am less concerned now with the program's continuation as I amabout its possible erosion because of .a desire for cost savings re-gardless of the impact on the program. If you are going to have aprogram, let's at least fund the program at an adequate level to dothe job that,the program is deSigned to do.

The Job Corps is being expected to operate at the lowest budgetin recent years arid at the lowest number of staff in the nationaland regional offices. Authorized positions in Job Corps regional of-fices decreased by over 40 percent, 42.8 percent to be exact, in thesame 5-year period that enrollment increased by 82.8 percent andthe number of centers expanded by '7'7.9 percent.

It is my opinion, sir, that any additional reductions in staff andcontinuing changes of personnel can only harm the Job Corps Pro-gram.

I believe that contractors today are operating centers with themaximum accountability. Extensive audits over the past year ,didnot uncover any significant mismanagement or fraud or abuse.

At our largest center, where over 8 contract years were audited,over $100 million of contract dollars, the -auditors found absolutelyno disallowed expense, no questionable cause.

In the case of serious incidents which are of legitimate concernin areas where centers are located, I submit that the number of se-rious incidents committed by youth enrolled-in Job Corps is far lessthan the rate of occurrence among similar youth in the generalpopulation. The emphasis on reporting of seriotis incidents at JobCorps Centers cannot be allowed to diminish the much more signif-icant and positive actions of these young adults during their JobCorps enrollment.

I am simply saying, look at the positive side of this and the gainis highly significant.

At the same time I would urge that private operators of JobCorps Centers should be provided the same protection from law-suits for liability for serious incidents as is the Government' underthe Federal Torts Claim Act.

Singer's involvement in JTPA's dislocated worker programs con-firmed that less skilled workers are simply in less demand. JobCorps must recognize this by upgrading the centers' training facili-ties and equipment and offering more advanced training . at thecenters.

A majoL difference between JTPA or vocational education pro-grams and Jui) Corps is the residential nature of Job Corps. Thereis no "question that the removal of disadvantaged youth from homeenvironments and peer group influences, that often create negativeattitudes toward learning, work, and responsible citizenship, is es-sential in dealing with this hardest-to-employ segment.

150

147

A major requirement of any increased funding is to improve thefacilities, particularly the older Centers, with space inadequaciesand in need of repairs and improvements.,

Corps members in the building trade skillsand I would likeparticularly to mention this where they are taught by unions, theNational Association of Homebuilders, or contracts, are capable oftremendous. construction work for renovating Job Corps facilities.They need some money for materials.

By working on these projects, Corps members gain realistic train-ing and pride in their visible accomplishments. Obviously, I believethere is more yet to be done to continue the record of excellence forwhich Job Corps is known.

The program has proven effective; and it deserves protectionagainst inadequate funding, administrativeI will use the word"overkill," because I think excessive audits after the fact are di-verting moneys that could be used for program enhancement, or

: the lack of program improvement.Thank you.[The prepared statement of Mr. Watkins follows:]

151

c.

148

Testimony by H.W. Watkins, Vice President and General Manager,The Singer Company, Career Systems

Before the Senate Labor and Human Resources Committee

February 8, 1984

I am Herbert W. Watkins Alice President and General Manager of the Career Sys-tems operation of The Singer Company. Singer currently manages 12 Job Corpscenters under contract to the U.S. Department of Labor, through its Employmentand Training Administration. Two years ago, we operated an equal number of,vocational assessment and training programs funded through various titles ofthe. CETA legislation. We are marketing similar programs and related productsto the newly formed JTPA service delivery areas, as well as to other govern-ment agencies, to the military and to industry, principally in the UnitedStates. We have also operated programs in the public schools, in vocationalrehabilitation facilities and in correctional institutions.

The Job Corps program remains our base of greatest experience, as well as thelargest percentage of our annual sales. I personally became involved with JobCorps when it las still under the auspices of the Office of Economic Opportun-ity. In its Most 20-year history, the program has come under attack severaltimes, from different Administrations. It has survived largely because ofwidespread and bipartisan Congressional support engendered by the program'seffectiveness with the disadvantaged young men and women who have enrolled inJob Corps.

I am not concerned now as to the program's continuation as much as I am aboutits possible erosion from the desire for cost savings regardless of the ulti-mate expense to this program.

The Job Corps budget in the Fiscal Year 1984 appropriations bill, the lowestin recent years, results in a 10 percent cut-from the 1983 operating budget.The reduction is even greater for program year 1985, because there will be nocarry-in monies nor is. there any provision, in either year for an inflation-ary factor.

Job Corps has also suffered serious personnel reductions, particularly at theRegional Office levels. In the five years between 1978 and 1983, the numberof enrollees increased 82.8 percent and the number of centers expanded by 77.9percent. Authorized positions in Job Corps Regional Offices, however, de-creased by 42.8 percent. Experienced Job Corps staff have been "bumped out"by senior transfers from other ETA functions-- generally CETA and EmploymentService. The majority of these individuals do not appear to have the sameinterest or competency, based upon experience, of those they replaced. Thecontractors' job has been made more difficult in light of this lack of knowl-edge and continuity for evaluating bid proposals, selecting contractors, con-ducting center reviews and acting on requests for approval. There are in-creasing requirements for the contractors, with less capability for corres-ponding responsiveness by the government.

I believe that the contractors are operating centers under the maximum degreeof accountability possible. Extensive audits have been conducted dur:ng thepast year. Despite some preconceived notions to the contrary, the audits sim-ply did not uncover any significant

mismanagement of government funds, nor did

152

149

they indicate fraud or abuse on the part of Job Corps operators. At Singer'slargest center, the auditing of over $121,693,780 expenditures, covering eightcontract years, found absolutely no disallowed costs and, more surprising per-haps, zero dollars of questioned costs.

Another area of concern to the C',ngressional districts where centers are lo-cated is the occurrence of significant inc;dents, ranging from assaults andother serious criminal actions to those which may simply lead to negative andoften uninformed media, or citizen attention. I submit that the number of ser-ious incidents committed by the young people in Job Corps is far less than therate of occurrence among similar populations in the public schools. I believethat it is time that this matter be put in proper perspective in regard to itsnot becoming a "witch hunt" issue diminishing the much more significant andpositive actions of these young people during their Job Corps enrollment. I

would urge also that operators of Job Corps centers should be provided adegree of protection from third-party law suits, as is the government undertht Federal Tort Claims Act. Our corporate attorneys have drafted such a pos-sible amendment to the. Job Training Partnership Act.

Another area that private hilliness contractors, particularly those represent-ing large industrial co'porations, should be concerned about is the quality ofthe vocational training. I personally believe that the true mission of JobCorps remains the same as that of the Job Training Ilartnership Act, which is,training leading to gainful employment. We must upgrade the centers' trainingfacilities, equipment and teaching methods Ind make certain that we are train-ing in the correct skills needed by employers today and in the near future.The Ford Foundation has been warning us for some time that technical skillrequirements for entry-level jobs are rising. Singer's recent work with twoJTPA Dislocated Worker programs confirmed that companies are using technologyand their work forces to improve their productivity and quality control. Lessskilled workers are simply in less demand. Job Corps and JTPA must acknowl-edge this reality.

Clearly, the residential nature of Job Corps adds to its cost, through relatedsupport staff, ilities and functions. Just as clearly, residential livingat Job Corps pro..des an opportunity for the individual youth to mature, muchas for the college student away from home for the first time. It is especial-ly necessary for young people in this population--many of whom have home en-vironments and peer group influences that have produced negative attitudestoward learning, work and society's objectives of responsible citizenship. Bycontrast, Job Corps dormitory life Fosters cooperation, racial/ethnic under-standing,, and a pride and respect for one's living conditions.

Many of these Job Corps facilities need improvement. Health and safety codesmust be met, certainly, but more attention should be paid, as well, to class-room and other space inadequacies. Corpsmembers in the building trade skills,whether taught by unions, the National Association of Home Builders, or thecontractors, are capable of tremendous construction work. If the funding ismade sufficient for these projects, existing centers, particularly the older,larger s,tes, can be improved and even expanded to serve more youths whileoffering practical training experience.

.n closing, this program is proven effective and it deserves protectionagainst inadequate funding or other harmful actions.

150°

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Watkins.I would like to say to everybody here that I think Bob Marquardt

and Bernie Diamond, who is seated behind him, have done more tohelp me understand Job Corps, the problems and the benefits ofJob Corps, than any two people. I have had a lot of help from a lotof other people as well, but I really appreciate the efforts that theyhave put forth in their own quiet ways to try to help me under-stand how important this program is. They, started right after I gotelected to the Senate and put on this committee. I really appreciatethe efforts that you have put forth, both of you.

Bob, we will turn to you at this time.If you could limit your remarks to about 5 minutes, I hate to cut

you off but we want to ask a few questions before I leave.

STATEMENT OF ROBERT L. MARQUARDT, CHAIRMAN ANDPRESIDENT, MANAGEMENT AND TRAINING CORP., OGDEN, UT

Mr. MARQUARDT. Thank you for your kind words, Mr. Chairman,and for the opportunity to be here and represent Management andTraining Corp.

I would like to begin by also giving an accolade to Jerry Bondand Kris Iverson on your committee. They do great work in sup-porting this in the private sector. They keep us informed. They askfor our ideas. I think that it is an outstanding committee.

Jerry Bond did graduate from Job Corps, and certainly he is theepitome of what we are talking about here todaysuccess.

I want to compliment and second my peers' comments. I certain-ly agree with them all. Being in a wrap-up position, I will try to hitsome points that perhaps they did not hit as hard as I would have.

I have also submitted a paper for the record, and will try todepart from that at this point and mention some general com-ments.

I certainly give an accolade to the DOL administrators of the ad-ministration. They have brought many efficiencies in the procure-ment area. They have started some initiatives in the capital areathat are long overdue. Literally, at Job Corps Centers we have hadlittle or no equipment and capital rehab upgrading for the past 3years.

They can talk openly about modernizing to today's industry, butif there is not money for the modern equipment to go along withtoday's careers, obviously the Centers cannot go into that area. Ithink they certainly need to put the dollars with the new careersif, indeed, we are going to modernize our career offerings.

I think there is a peril in approaching literally the same budgetyear after year. For the past 3 years, as contractors, we have beentold to either reduce our budgets or to have a very modest increase.We have done that, and we have done that successfuly, but I thinkthere is the point where you cannot continue to take out of laborand you cannot continue to take out of employment benefits andhold the quality of the program. I, indeed, think that $600 millionis not a fair number for Job Corps, and it needs to be reexamined. Ithink it should be upward--

The CHAIRMAN. If you were asked what would be a fair number,what would you say?

154

151

Mr. MARQUARDT. Certainly, from the operational sense, some-thing more like $615 to $620 million would be the number that Iwould seek, plus the capital and equipment that is needed. I thinkreally what is vitally needed is a long-term capital plan. I do notthink Job Corps has had one for the 19 years..that our company hasparticipated with Job Corps.The CHAIRMAN. I would like to hear from all four of you andother Job Corps leaders throughout the country on what you thinkyou need as far as capital equipment. You are talking about $620million, $20 million more than what we have featured in thebudget, and what you need for capital equipment for the long term.Mr. MARQUARDT. I have no visibility, Senator, in terms of theother companies' needs. I have heard their comments, but thatneeds to be examined by DOL center by center by center.Another area that I think is suspect in terms of changes neededis in the 50-50 evaluation. Job Corps staff at the regional andWashington level has been cut for about 3 xears in a row, and herewe go on another cut.Now it is very good, I think, administratively to say we can takeanother personnel cut. I, indeed, think they cannot take anotherpersonnel cut. I 'think the Job Corps Program has succeeded be-cause of its supreme accountability, specificity is very detailed, andI do not think an administrator from another program can come inand summarily evaluate our proposals without causing problems interms of not being. fair to the incumbent centers and not being fairto experienced contractors. Maybe too many evaluations arecoming out in an all-equal basis.Right now I am specifically talking about the 50-50 condition,50-50 evaluation, meaning 50 percent of the evaluators are non-JobCorps people. I think that started perhaps primarily because oflack of personnel at the regional level. They do not have sufficientpersonnel, in my judgment, to do the accountability audits thatthey need on even a yearly basis, but they certainly need to haveexperienced people doing evaluations of programs and proposals.A bank would not have its books examined by an administratorwho knows the food business or the health business. A new B-3wing design would not have an administrator in food and health doa judgment in terms of the proposal aerodynamically, physically, etcetera. I think Job Corps is a very specific program, and I think theevaluation should be by people who know Job Corps, who havewalked the centers, and indeed know what they are talking about.In closing, I would like to give a comment. I have heard variousnumbers in terms of costs. The DOL officials talked about $13,000-plus as a high cost. They say expensive. I say it is a very cost-effec-tive number, and I would like to make a comparison.The average stay in Job Corps by a Job Corps student in fiscalyear 1983 was 7.8 months. Doing a ratio on that 7.8 months, of the$13,262, really what you are talking about is an $8,620 trainingcost for all students going into Job Corps. That is the average cust.That compares highly in comparison to a JPTA cost of $5,900 for 3months' skilled training only. It compares high in terms of maybethe overall voc-ed budget. However, the Job Corps costs involve thewhole person.

155

152

When you talk to employers for OJT or placement, they are in-terested in a person who will come to work. They are interested inone who will communicate. They are interested in one who will getalong with fellow employees. The social skills have to be taught.

I just walked into a center yesterday, one of our centers, Man-agement and Training Corp., at Albany, GA. I looked at the corn;puter runout: what were the average education and math skills ofthose students at that center? Average: third grade. I have broughtthe Sullivan Series of average, three grades which I would like tosubmit and also the math for average three. I would like to let thecommittee examine what the potential capability of those peopletoday of entering JTPA for skilled training and a job. The employ-ers are not taking third grade, fourth grade, fifth grade, sixthgrade, seventh grade into JPTA in the main.

The CHAIRMAN. What you are saying is that, as important as theJob Training Partnership Act is, it really isn't going to reach thesepeople without the basic education the Job Corps will give them?

Mr. MARQUARDT. It certainly is not.The CHAIRMAN. You will prepare them to enter into JTPA and

perhaps even go way beyond that.Mr. MARQUARDT. There are 1 million dropouts per year out of

the public schools. Ninety percent of our students are dropouts. Ithink the average grade level is much lower than the sixth or sev-enth grade that has been talked about in years past. I think it is,indeed, the fifth grade, and in the Southern States it is around thethird grade.

It is a marvelous program. Our company has been in training in-dustrially, foreign, almost every department in the country, andthis is the best return for the taxpayer.

Thank you.[The prepared statement of Mr. Marquardt follows:]

156

168

TESTIMONY BEFORE THE UNTIED STATES SENATE

LABOR AND HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE

FEBRUARY 8, 1984

BY

ROBERT L. MARQUARDT, PH.D.

CHAIRMAN AND PRESIDENT

MANAGEMENT AND TRAINING CORPORATION

Chairman Hatch, Members of the Committee, Guests....

It is indeed an honor for me to return to Congress to again testify in

behalf of the status of your National Job Corps program. Your program is

still the very best alternative offered to unemployed, unskilled youth. It is

the most successful and comprehensive accountable training system available in

the free world, with a very respectable job placement rate. Reportedly, in

FY '83, 50 percent of all enrollees obtained jobs or joined our U. S. military

services. In addition, 25 percent pursued further educational or vocational

training.

From all over the world, many educational dignitaries visit your Job

Corps centers so they can duplicate all or parts of the Job Corps miracle.

Your centers provide a needed change of environment for youth who have dropped

out of school and have less than average 6th grade reading and math skills.

In addition to basic educational advancement, these students learn career

skills and develop interpersonal techniques which allow them to succeed in

the working world.

157

154

What is my reference point to make such a'positive claim? As Chairman

and President of the Managepent and Training Corporation (the Education and

Training Divisionof Thiokol until December 198(), I am aware of our staff's

contribution to the Job Corps story from its beginning in 1965. We presently

operate six model Job C. ,rps centers for the Department of Labor in Atlanta,

Georgia; Albany, Georgia; Charleston, West Virginia; Shreveport, Louisiana;

Reno, Nevada; and Clearfield, Utah. We have trained over 126,000 corpsmembers

and it is conservatively estimated 80 percent of our corpsmembers have been

placed on jobs, or into advanced education. Many have entered college or

universities and received degrees. Some of our graduates are now operating

their own businesses successfully.

Job Corps serves youth 'ram every state, from rural and urban lifestyles,

and from all different racial and ethnic backgrounds. Job Corps also serves

hundreds of youth from Indochina and, from its beginning, has been inter-

national in scope. Of the 4,565 corpsmembers presently enrolled in the six

MTC managed centers, 300 are Indochinese. Many corpsmembers; upon arrival,

are illiterate or nonfunctional readers and need to acquire the social skills

(communication, job responsibilities, work ethic, working with fellow

employees, code of conduct) as well as vocational training and upgraded basic

education levels.

Job Corps has always been operated on yery detailed specifications. That

specificity, coupled with ongoing DOL program management and yearly DOL

program audits, has assured quality programs. Recently, DOL and Congress

also initiated long overdue financial audits. If the results of all centers

are like ours, the degree of questioned costs are less 'han one-half of one

percent of contract value and final settlement will be substantially less.

158

155

The Job Corps program management by DOL is experiencing continuous

erosion of the experienced DOL Regional and Washington staff. Over recent

years, many experienced and highly technical program managers of Job Corps

have been lost through bumping,.riffing, and cuts. Job Corps is a most

comprehensive program to operate and manage, and -DOL management cannot afford

the yearly losses of its trained staff. Every time you lose experienced Job

Corps program management in wholesale lots you lose program audit capability,

you open the door to unqualified bidders, and you most definitely lower the

quality of the progrhm.

Many. domestic programs have been terminated or reduced because of

shifting priorities at the National level. Many in Congress and in the

Department of Labor have said that the Job Corps program has survived because

of its high success rate and detailed accountability to prove its high return

on taxpayers' investments. "This investment returns approximately 45 percent

more than the cost to the taxpayers," as reported in the Evaluation of the-

Economic Impact, an extensive study conducted by Mathematica Policy Research.

This being the case, the program actually makeS money for the Government

rather than costing. Summary highlights of this report are attached for your

review.

Have Job Corps budgets remained adequate? No, they have not! Job Corps

contract budgets have been constantly eroded or held at approximately the same

level. Yet, medical costs, food, utilities, etc. have increased yearly. Every

year contractors are asked to hold the line, give few merit raises, cut the

materials, reduce costs, etc. This is proper up to a point, but that approach,

year after year, is not econanically feasible or sensible. Where can we as

managers logically find ways to hold the quality of the program, yet take care

of inflation without contract cost increases or minimal ones at best?

159

F

156

Job Corps vitally needs a long-range plan for upgrading facilities and

equipment or Job Corps will no longer be as successful nor continue to be a

national model for the world to duplicate. Despite the concentrated efforts

of contractors to maintain your facilities, some Job Corps center facilities

are alarmingly in need of repair and urgently need your attention to obtain an

adequate budget level to operate efficiently. Poor facilities and equipment

have a direct impact on negative incidents and adversely affect program

results.

We have been advised by Department of Labor officials that Job Corps cost

per slot for 12 months in FY '83 was $13,262. The current average length of

stay is 7.8 months. Thus, the current average cost per each participating

enrollee is $8,620. Is that a high cost? It is, in comparison to public

school vocational education budgets per student. Ninety percent of the Job

Corps enrollees are dropouts from public schools. They are economically

disadvantaged and have failed to acquire minimal reading and math skills

through the public school system. They certainly are not employable in the

employment market of today for other than part-time or temporary work.

I believe that $8,620 is a realistic average cost for each participating

student in Job Corps in FY '83. However, I believe it is an 'unrealistic cost

for FY '84 or FY '85. For Job Corps students, there is no other alternative

that provides all the necessary components they need to be able to enter the

work force. The average cost target to train an'adult under JTPA for this FY

is $5,900. This training does not provide food, lodging, medical, dental,

counseling, clothing, major educational rehab, etc., and for the most part

provides only quick entry-level career training. The typical JTPA bid we have

examined is for three to four months of preliminary skill training only. I

160

157

believe that the JTPA cost targets are reasonable for adults with high school

diplomas and previous work experience, but that the training time is not. An

average training time of six months for JTPA enrollees is more realistic. Job

Corps enrollees, 90 percent of which are high school dropouts and needing a

change in living environments, certainly do not fit into nest state JTPA

programs and, thus, have limited rehabilitation alternatives.

For welfare recipients enrolled in Title 11-A programs, the Labor

Department proposed a job placement rate of 39 percent (Manpower Vocational

Educational Weekly dated 5 January 1984); yet, Job Corps places 50 pe^cent of

all enrollees on a job or in the mili ary, and 25 percent additional enrollees

into further training or colleges.

Job Corps works because of all the various integrated components it

offers, plus the necessary change of environment into a highly counseled

residential setting. Typical youth training programs without the residential

component find absenteeism of disastrous proportions. Deleterious community,

home, or gang environments take their toll oil skills achievement and

-attendance of typical dropout youth enrolled in non-residential training

programs.

The California Youth Authority data (see attachment) clearly shows the

need for change in environment for young adults coming from areas of

delinquency, broken homes, etc. Of those youth incarcerated in California in

1982:

Seventy-two percent came from neighborhoods with high ormoderate delinquency,

-'fifty percent had one parent, brother, or sister who had adelinquent or criminal record,

Forty-eight percent had undesirable peer influences.

40-051 0-84-11

161

158

Those statistics vividly show why high school dropouts from high delin-

quency areas and with undesirable peer influences should go to a residential

Job Corps center which provides a change to a positive environment for,

learning.

Much emphasis has been given in recent months to reducing negative

incidents. This is good. We should always, as operators of centers, make

this a high priority. We have excellent student accountability systems,

student incentive systems, and do abide by center and state laws. Students

must learn to live and work in a framework of law and order before they can

hold jobs and become responsible citizens. However, while we as a contractor

do the best job possible to provide a safe environment conducive to learning,

negative situations will occur. Every city, town, and school, including the

Job Corps center, will always have a small percentage of the population which

departs from what is right. Some students will not conform to rules no matter

how excellent the motivational factors, the positive school environment, or

how qualified or ample the staff.

Mr. Gordon Berlin, program officer of the Ford Foundation, recently

stated at the National Governors' Association Conference on employment

training policy that "Forty percent of all unonployed are 16 to 24 years old.

Youth unemployment is expected to rise, because the percentage of disadvan-

taged and minority youth is rising as a percent of the total population."

With our present millions of youth unemployed and "on the street," dare

we fail to adequately fund the finest youth skills training and placement

program in the United States? Dare we fail to retain our remaining DOL Job

Corps experienced staff? And dare we fail to truly examine the quality and

cost of the alternatives which include lifetime unemployment benefits and/or

162

159

the tremendously high cost of incarceration? Incarceration costs for youth in

California, for example, cost $21,000 to $24,000 per year.

In conclusion, thank you" for this, opportunity to address your Committee

on Job Corps. Job Corps budgets and training slots should be expanded this

year, not cut as they have been in recent years. Its success stories are

real, are commonplace, and its failures are few. The Job Corps Charter is for

skills training,, job placement, and human development ...our unemployed

youths' hope... and your investment in America's future.

Senator Hatch, you have repeatedly visited the Clearfield Job Corps

Center and are aware of our success with your program. I welcome your

Committee to visit any of the centers operated by MTC.

Thank you.

163

t!)

160

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you.I just want to say to all of you that I have really looked into the

Job Corps. Yes, there are faults; there are things that need to bestraightened up; there are facilities that are inadequate. Some ofthem look like Holiday Inns and others like penitentiaries. I willnot say anything more beyond that. The fact is we have to straight-en them up. However, all of them do a pretty good job for theseyouth who otherwise do not have any help in society, do not haveany opportunity at all.

I agree with you; I don't think that you have enough money tocontinue to upgrade and to do the job that you have to do to bringthese kids into a marketplace in the eighties. We will see what wecan do about some of those things.

I want to thank all of you for your comments here today aboutthe Job Corps Program and S. 2111, the bill that we have filed.

Your presence here today will help to ensure that this committeerecommends the proper improvements in the Job Corps Program. Ithink we will act more on an informed basis.

Bernie?Mr. DIAMOND. Senator, you commented earlier and asked for the

contractors to provide information on what they feel is needed forcapital improvements.

The CHAIRMAN. That is correct.Mr. DIAMOND. Within the past year all centers have been asked

by the. Department of Labor and the Job Corps office to submittheir capital needs for improvements for both facilities and equip-ment. They should be able to give you those gross numbers.

The CHAIRMAN. We ought to have all 107 of them submit theircapital needs to us, and let's take a look at it, because somethingclearly needs to be done. We have a successful program that reallyhelps people who otherwise will be very unsuccessful, but with theprogram can become very successful, as Jerry here has become. Heis certainly a major advisor to me. I really am proud of him andothers whom I know about, such as the young woman at the air-port, who had such poise and confidence. In fact, I have thoughtmany times since, why didn't I say, "Why don't you come down toWashington and interview with us?" It was one of those quickmeetings, and we were in a hurry, you know, but I wanted to stop.She was so proud to have graduated from the Job Corps. She wasgoing to get P job come hell or high water; it was just that simple. Iwas really impressed with her.

Let me just ask a few questions of the entire panel. You are allaware there are substantial differences in the quality of the vari-ols local programs around the country. I have mentioned thatsome of them look like Holiday Inns while others resemble peniten-tiaries ' e degree. Obviously, one of the challenges that this pro-gram faces is whether it can provide a quality service at each oneof its locations.

Now as experts in the Job Corps field, what do you think reallyhas caused this great disparity among the various facilities?

Bob.Mr. MARQUARDT. I think there are some basic differences, first of

all, in the original facilities that were provided. Some of us wentinto facilities that were really downtrod and with no capital money

164

161

to fix them up, so they had a very late start in life. Others, luckily,went into facilities that were a little bit better.

I also think some organizations, which is my second point, em-phasize quality more than others. I think they certainly approachthe humanity of creating a home life atmosphere more at somecenters than others. You do that by getting the students involvedin a strong residential program, get them to participate and beauti-fy the facility. If they beautify the facility and there Lire incentivesprovided for the beautification, and it is well planned and moni-tored, then the rapid deterioration stops.

I think some of us probably have been guilty over the years, notso much in recent years, of not stopping that rapid deterioration.You can put capital in, but if you do not have a system which pre-vents rapid deterioration, your centers will go downhill.

Student participation and changing the psychology of a center Ithink is really important. The use of surplus is very important.

The CHAIRMAN. When you say surplus, you mean Governmentsurplus?

Mr. MARQUARDT. Government surplus.I have already mentioned earlier the need for a long-range cap-ital plan and the follow-through and implementation of that. Hope-fully, that is under way.The CHAIRMAN. Any other comments?Mr. Watkins?Mr. WATKINS. Mr. Chairman, there were two ways of Job Corps

Centers being established. The originalor I will refer to them asthe older centersoccurred before the expansion which increasedthe number of centers to 105 or 106 today. The rehabilitation doneon the newer centers was more complete and done to a betterdegree than the older centers. What you are seeing in some of thedisparity is the difference between the older centers and the newercenters, and the amount of rehabilitation funds that were avail-able.

The :second point I would like to make is that the facilities acrossthe country .vary. You had old military, World War II-type bar-racks in some of the centers. You had newer type buildings exem-plified by a former college that had been taken (Ater. Accordingly,you see quite a bit of difference between the two.

The key to all of this, Mr. Chairman, in my opinion, is that thereneeds to be a long-term capital funding plan, because otherwiseyou are not going to be able to bring these centersthey will neverlook alike, but you want to bring them to the same level of adequa-

ou need a capital funding program for this, and it needs to bea long-term basis. The remarks made by Bob Marquardt werevery appropriate.

I just want to emphasize one other thing. There is a tremendousamount of work going on in these centers to improve the centersdone by the corpsme in the construction trades. If everyone inthis room could see some of the work that they have done in con-structing buildings, in reconstructing buildings, you would be trulyamazed. The cost of doing that has been si,,I,ificantly lower than itwould have been if they had put those up for bid. There is a key tothe best utilizeion of money to improve the facilities.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you.

.165

162

I have to leave to go to the Rules Committee. I am very gratefulto have Senator Hawkins here, who will continue with some of thequestions that both of us have on this particular program.

Let me just say, without objection, we will place the testimony ofthe National Football League Players Association- into the recordimmediately following the last oral testimony. We appreciate theeffort they have put forth to provide some testimony for us heretoday as well as the work that they do with regard to the JobCorps Centers.

If you will forgive me, I am going to have to run. I am grateful toSenator Hawkins for br,lag here.

Thank you for your testimony. I really appreciate it at this hear-ing

nator HAWKINS [acting chairperson]. I am pleased to chair theremainder of these hearings while Senator Hatch testifies beforethe Rules Committee on the committee budget for the Labor Com-mittee for the rest of this year.

I am a strong supporter of the Job Corps Program. As you allknow, we have three centers in Florida: Jacksonville, Gainesville,and a brand-new center in Miami.' Like Senator Hatch, I am inter-ested in ensuring that these Employment and Training CentersPrograms under the Job Corps operate as efficiently and as effec-tively as is possible.

The question which I believe Senator Hatch was on was this:there are basically two kinds of facilities in the program, the Con-

, servation Corps Centers and facilities run by private contractorssuch as yourselves. According to the documentation supplied by theDepartments of Labor, Interior, and Agriculture, there is signifi-cant disparity between the cost of operating these two kinds of fa-cilities. The Conservation Corps Centers are more costly on a percapita basis and handle fewer students.

In your opinion, what is the cause of this disparity?Dr. Marquardt?Mr. MARQUARlYr. I will try it.This is an area where we probably all are prejudiced because it

does represent an area of additional work for us. However, to lay itstraight, as I see it, I think smaller centers are more expensive.The biggest difference in the contracted centers and the Govern-ment smaller centers, the Conservation Centers, I believe is inwages and benefits, and a third area, which is a sleeper, and I donot think DOL is really looking at it, and that is the VST area.This is equipment dollars or rehab dollars that go with workprojects.

The Conservation Centers get a stipend per student across theboard. The contracted centers mostly have not even had VST dol-lars until recently, and only in the trade areas. I think there canbe an equalization in that area which would really bring the costdown of the Conservation Centers.

Those are basically the three thoughts that I have.Senator HAWKINS. Does anyone else have a comment?Mr. WATKINS. Yes, Senator. I might add I have been associated

in one assignment or another with the Job Corps since its incep-tion. I have always thought that one of the strengths of the JobCorps was the balance. Programs were run by the Government,

166

163

were run by private-for-profit contractors, and run by organizationsnot for profit. They made a great contribution through the years,and I think the balance has been a very significant thing.However, we are in a cituation of priorities. We have a littlemoney to do the most good. I think it is significant that contractorswill operate the centers because of their concern over unit cost andbidding at a lower cost. Therefore, more dollars will be availablefor the program.However, I would hasten to add that there is a lot that has takenplace at the Conservation Centers in the development of workprojects that perhaps contributed, to a large degree, to the cost ofthose programs. That should be judged fairly.In other outcomes of the program, I do not believe that the Con-servation Centers have failed. We are talking about, can the job bedone at a lower cost. The answer to that is, yes, if they are bid.Senator HAWKINS. Do you believe it would help the program ifthe Conservation Corps Centers were replaced by programs run byprivate contractors?Mr. WATKINS. It is a cost-effective answer that I have to give you.If we can give you the same quality job at a lower cost, the answerto that is yes.I believe that the outcomes of the private contractors have beensuch that we could give you that assurance, and it simply comesdown to getting the most for your buck.Senator HAWKINS. That is what we are trying to do up here. It isvery difficult,What kind of residential support programs are available withinthe centers; that is drug and alcohol rehabilitation and Englishlanguage proficiency instruction, et cetera? How do sach programsdiffer among centers? Do any of you know?Mr. SIMMONS. Senator Hawkins, I think practically every centerI know of has drug and rehabilitation counselors that work withthe enrollees that need it. I cannot answer abuut the differences

among various centers, but I think practically all the contract cen-ters have counselors that work with the enrollees who need thiskind of support.Senator HAWKINS. Does anybody know about the English lan-guage proficiency instruction?Mr. SIMMONS. That is generally spelled out in the Request forProposal, as to whether or not you would, have other than Englishlanguage. Minact does not have any callers that require that dueto the section of the country in which we are located. However, Ibelieve that the Department of Labor spells out that requirement,whether or not there is a requirement, in the Request for Proposal.Senator HAWKINS. Are there any ways to improve recruitment ofstudents in need of Job Corps training? Do any of you have anyideas how we could improve recruitment?Miami has problems in recruitment. How do young people findout about the Job Corps Program? Do any of you know?Mr. GAINES. I think that generally we have been able to keep allof our centers at the maximum capacity, depending on what the re-quirement of the Government is at that moment. By that, I mean ifthey are in a little bit of a budget squeeze, they say to us--"they"meaning the Department of Labor"We would like to see your

167

164

centers operate at 99-percent capacity," let's say, and the recruit-ment effort slides off a little bit and we are able to operate at 99percent. Then they say, "Well, OK, now things are looking better.Let's operate at 102 percent." Lo and behold, the recruitment is ac-complished and all of the centers are then operating at 102-percentcapacity.

By all that, I am essentially saying that, other than an isolatedincident here or there, I believe thatand I do not know, my com-panions here at the table might have some other thoughts, but ithas been my experience and knowledge that we have not had trou-ble keeping the centers filled, depending on the budget require-ments.

You came in a little bit late, but I am president of the TeledyneEconomic Development Co. We have two centers in your fair State,one in Gainesville and one in Jacksonville. I know you have visitedat least one, if not both of them.

If it was Gainesvilledo you recall which one?Senator HAWKINS. Gainesville.Mr. GAINES. If it was Gainesvillethat is the pretty onethere

has been a lot of conversation about facilities. We were very fortu-nate in Gainesville. That is sort of the luck of the draw or the rollof the dice. What happened there was there were decisions made toput a center in the Gainesville area by DOL, a decision made thatthat would be a good place to put one. Lo and behold, they found abeautiful electronics plant that was down there sitting on 15 acreswith pine trees and a nice green lawn and relatively new construc-tion, and the company had moved out. The Government was ableto buy it relatively cheaply and was able to reconstruct it and reha-bilitate it for the purpose of a Job Corps center, and it is perfectlybeautiful.

On the other hand, I am running one in Phoenix, which was anempty warehouse that was full of dead pigeons in 1969. I will neverforget it. I came to that thing and said, "Oh, my God, can we evermake a Job Corps center out of it?" We did. That was the luck ofthe draw in 1969.

That is what all this dh.parity is when we talk about facilitieslooking like penitentiaries. Some of the larger centersand HerbWatkins runs a very large one called the Earl C. Clements Center,which was an old Army camp back in the forties. You cannot makea silk purse out of a sow's ear. However, by the same token, it wasthe only thing that was of a size to train 2,8U0 enrollees.

You can go right across the river here to the Potomac Center. Iwalked through that at the time they were considering makingthat a Job Corps center, and I covered my eyes. As a matter of fact,I was walking along with Mr. Watkins and I said, "My God, whatcan they ever clJ with this thing? It's falling down."

Well, they did something with it. They kept propping it up. Youwould fix a ceiling and it would fall down again.

Then you go from the ridiculous, which that was it was a verytough thing to doand go to the sublime which is the center inyour State. Every time I drive up in frontand you can see myname here, John Gaines I say, "'My God, there is the GainesvilleCenter. My Daddy would be pro..td of me." [Laughter.]

I am very proud of that center in your State.

168

165

Thank you.Senator HAWKINS. We are, too, but I didn't know it was named

. after you. [Laughter.]Mr. WATKINS. Senator, I might add that I believe there is a back-

log of people, young people, waiting to get in Job Corps Centersacross the country.

Second, I might point out that in the majority of our centers, andcertainly in the center that John just mentioned, when we go attimes to surge capacity, we seem to be able to do that relativelyquickly. "Surge capacity" means over 100-percent capacity at thecenter. This indicates that there are people out there ready andwanting to get into the program.

Senator HAWKINS. How can the Job Corps Program do a betterjob of ensuring that the local centers are training students in skillsthat are in demand in the v... ious local labor markets? Do youhave any suggestions on that?

Mr. SIMMONS. I think that you are going to have to make surveysperiodically to be sure that you are training to meet those skills.However, I want to be quick to point out that we get youngstersfrom all over the region in which the centers are located. I do notthink you can tie it just to those local communities. It has to be acalculated thing as to the occupations for which you give training.

I do think that some study, some surveys, and some things needto be done to be sure we keep up to date.

Senator HAWKINS. Section 4 of S. 2111 contains suggestions forspecific performance standards for the Job Corps Program, such asthe number of enrollees earning certificates of graduation fromhigh school or the GED [the general equivalency diploma); thenumber of enrollees who pass the competency test in mathematics,reading, and composition; the number of enrollees who have en-tered employment in this field in which the enrollees receive train-ing; and the number of enrollees who successfully enlist in theArmed Forces of the United States.

In your opinion, are these standards too restrictive or not com-prehensive enough?

Dr. Marquardt.Mr. MARQUARDT. On that one, I would say that they are too re-

strictive. I would like to skip back a minute to the question before:How can we do a better job in terms of staying up with the labormarket?

I think each center, without any cost to the Government, canhave an industry advisory committee to help tell us, from a broadspectrum, 50 to 100 membersunion and industryto tell us whatare the trends.

The National Job Corps, at no cost to the Government, can alsohave a national industry advisory committee, which is long over-due.

We can also utilize national job survey information. It is avail-able. A lot of us need to utilize it, including the DOL administra-tors.

More emphasis should be given in the RFP, the request for pro-posal, for a recommendation for alternate vocational areas thatmake more sense for that area and for the time.

169

166

Also, if you want to update to today's careers, you also have toupdate to today's equipment. It is very expensive. They have tolook at the capital costs realistically and plan their budget accord-ingly.

Thank you.Senator HAWKINS. A good addendum. Thank you.Can the information be easily gathered on enrollment and termi-

nation of enrollment, in your opinion, about the standards?Mr. WATKINS. Senator, the easiest information to obtain is at the

time of enrollment. Often it is difficult, particularly when it is fol-lowup information dealing with placement, retention, or other as-pects, to get that information back through the field, particularlywhere the center is being supplied by many States.

However, yes, to answer your question, it can be obtained.I believe that it is important that these numbers, if you will, be

kept to determine that you are, indeed, fulfilling the mission of thecenter.

I would like to point out that one thing that does worry me sooften in the setting of performance standards is this: the Job CorpsProgram is so complex, it contributes so much to disadvantagedyouth, that if you begin to emphasize some things over others, Iwould hate to see the neglect of those things perhaps not as easilyquantifiableneglected in the interest of merely serving to realizethe performance standards. I guess what I am trying to say in aroundabout way is, please keep them judicious, simplistic, andreadily quantifiable.

I would like to make one other comment, if I may, about the newskills reflecting the current needs of the marketplace. It ties inand I want to underscore what Bob saidit ties in with the avail-ability of equipment funds.

In many cases where we have surveyed and we have said,"There's a good job skill," we have had to answer the question,"Could we get the equipment necessary to teach this skill?" Someskills are capital-intensive.

Again, we come back to the real need for a good capital budgetfor equipment.

Senator HAwRiNs. Most economists agreethat is a bad way tostart a sentence. I have never seen economists agree on anything.Some economists agree that success in placement and upward mo-bility is tied, to a great extent, to the length of time in training.The average stay in a Job Corps Center is only about 3 to 4months. Two years are permitted, with the possibility of an addi-tional year of advanced career training beyond that.

Why do not more Job Corps students take full advantage of theJob Corps opportunity? How can this retention rate be improved?

Dr. Marquardt?Mr. MARQUARDT. The average that I have talked about, have

heard talked about by DOL administrators and certainly in ourown case, is 7.8 average. The three, the four, or the five is in yearspast. The students, indeed, are taking more advantage of the pro-gram. Many are going into advanced programs.

Some of us occasionally have the problemone of the goals ofDOL is in the WTR area, retention. The higher the retention, if

170L

167

you keop the student longer, then perhaps you are doing a betterjob than your counterpart. We are scored on WTR.I, myself, ethically feel that if a student is ready for the market-place and he can gain an entry job, and he has the social skills tostay on the job, we should not institutionalize the students as longas there is a big backlog.If we are going to be competitive with other programs, 1 think wedo, indeed, have to look at the cost area, There is no question aboutit that some students take '2 years, which is a $26,000 investment.

Some of them sail through. That is 2 years, 24 months. The aver-age is 7.8 months or $8,600 per student. That is what it cost usinglast fiscal year's statistics.

A lot of students do come through with 9th, 10th, 11th, and 121hgradehigh 'schoolabilities. They can make it in 3 months. How-ever, I think the average is much lower than the sixth or seventhgrade that the Job Corps talks about nationally. We have centersthat are only averaging third grade coming in. Indeed, they need 2years.Again, it is sort of a regional response that each of us have togive almost to individual centers.I believe, myself, that if they are ready, they should not be re-tained. They should be placed.Senator HAWKINS. Any other comments?Mr. WATKINS. I often find myself torn between whether really

what we should be doing is making it possible for this kid to getout on the road to :t productive life as soon as possible or whetherwe should try to place him a little higher on th, road so he can goa little further. The difficulty here 'is that you nave so many slots,you want to serve so many j'eople. Perhaps if he is there too long,he is occupying a slot that we can give another youngster a chance.This is a sense of balance.However, I would make this point, particularly in longer reten-tion: we have seen it go to Pi .8 months. That is today, with all thetalk of high technology new jobs being created. I think we have togo further indepth in our training. This is a good thing.Holding perhaps the youngsters a little longer to give them alittle more solid base is, indeed, a good move.Mr. MARQUARDT. It is the right trend.Senator HAWKINS. I want to thank you for being with us today,as well as all the other witnesses who were here.The committee is very interested in the Job Corps Program. It isvery important to disadvantaged youth and undo/ trained youth. Itis vital we maintain a constant oversight of the program to ensurethat we are operating it efficiently and effectively.We thank you for participating in this hearing.[Statement of National Football League Players Association and

additional material supplied for the record follows:]

171

111111.0111101Iimmorilw

168

NFLPA TESTIMONY FOR THE OVERSIGHT HEARING ON THE JOB CORPS

The National football League Players Association over the

past few years has had the privilege and pleasure of working

with the Job Corps. The NFLPA had over 500 athletes from every

phase of sports, including professionals and Olympic medal

winners, visit Job Corps Centers across the country to meet

with the young people. our task was to encourage these young

adults to follow through with their committment to themselves

and the Job Corps program, because Job Corps offered an

opportunity for them to develop marketable skills and become

productive citizens in our society. We encouraged the

surrounding citizen and political leaders in those cities to

develop a better understanding of Job Corps and what it was all

about. Some communities looked at Job Corps Centers as a place

for problem young people; we were able to change that attitude

in a number of cities.

In addition the athletes voluntarily taped Public Service

Announcements for radio and television. With the cooperation of

Commissioner Pete Rozelle and the NFL, we were able to schedule

the PSA's on prime time NFL football games. These spots

featured such players as Franco Harris, Charlie Taylor, Ron

Jaworski, from the NFL, and Tom and Dick Van Arsdile, fromthe

NBA, just to.name a few. The result was a record setting

enrollment in the Job Corps program and a better understanding<4*

from the communities. The association of our athletes with the

Job Corps was an tremendous that we had players who would go

back to the centers on their own time and help out.

172

169

In the event a similar program should again be available

we would not hesitate to get involved, because we feel these

if young adults are part of the lifeblood of our communities.

7 With our ever-changing technical society it's important that we

prepare our young people to deal with these changes, and the

Job Corps is an excellent place to provide that base.

Gene UpshawExecutive Director

Brig OwensAssistant to theExecutive Director

173

(1) COMPARISON c&' UNIT CC61S (OST/CMSY). (2) Civilian Conservation Centers (Cit's) vs.

Contract Centers (by Center Size)(3) Period Lbvered: FY 1982

COST CATE00RIL9

COMERVAVLoN CNNeLlti"API 135-250

0011111ACV CENTERS

USDAcon/cMsy,

USDI03ST/CSMy

ALL CCC'sCOSTA=4Y,

CAP 135 -250

COST/CSMY_CAF:251 -399

COST/CSMYCAP:400-599

cosT/CsmyCAP 600+=yaw ALL MSC WITS

COST/CSMY

Rae Living 4,784 4,385 4,646 3,345 2,985 3,084 3,241 3,131Education 924 952 934 690 598 657 602 622Vocational Training 2,262 2,352 2,293 9d2 1,103 1,187 1,127 1,121Medical 6 Dental 540 561 548 529 402 520 443 481Adman, ( "CPS ") 1,979 1,848 1,934 1,776 1,034 2,002 1,093 1,914ManagementG and DFee

1,397950

-0-

1,057038

-0-

1,179912

-0-

1,572554

336

1,274

552373

1,259433

334

1,053436299

1,218482334

-.1ea

Inane (manun) - 112 - 46 - 89 - 32 .- 24 - 39 - 55 - 40

CT2D'OP3 SUDR/TAL 12,724 11,947 12,357 9,752 9,177 9,517 8;239 9,263

Cru4t/Rehab 269 15 182 51 70 110 42 68

Equipment 77 79 78 225 73 100 60 89

Vehicles 26 152 70 68 ;52 43 51 51

VST 1,026 1,252 1,104 144 76 120 29 76

Facility Leases -0- -0- -0- 108 144 201 99 139

ChPITAL SUUBMAL 1,390 1,49B 1,434 596 415 574 281 423

wig Au tartrops + CAPITAL) 14,122 13,445 13,791 10,348 9,592 10,091 8,520 9,606

174

171

Senator HAWKINS. The committee will adjourn.[Whereupon, at 11:17 a.m., the committee recessed, to reconveneat the call of the Chair.]

0

175

DOCUMENT RESUME ED 253 744 · DOCUMENT RESUME ED 253 744 CE 040 757 TITLE Job Corps Amendments of...

Documents

Transcript of DOCUMENT RESUME ED 253 744 · DOCUMENT RESUME ED 253 744 CE 040 757 TITLE Job Corps Amendments of...